Catholics told not to give LDS parish data

Comments

Disclaimer: If you are extremely
conservative, almost to a puritanical state of mind, and cannot find humor in
life do not read any further.

Okay folks, you can all have my bones
and remains and do what you want with them after I'm dead and gone. Really, I
won't need them. I won't need my name as well since Joe is pretty common and I
expect some more to come along after I.

With religion has
always come war, as well as the war of ideas, this is nothing different. I
thought WE, as the human race, have far surpassed the age of enlightenment and
worked through our fears and superstitions? I guess there are a few stragglers
in any bunch.

Anonymous

July 21, 2009 7:25 p.m.

I'm a live. I've studied the history and beliefs of Mormonism and I freely
choose to believe Mormonism is bogus.

Anonymous

July 21, 2009 7:13 p.m.

I believe Heavenly Father wants us to do family history for our own benefit. We
learn so much about ourselves, by getting to know and appreciate our ancestors.
I don't believe for one second that someone will be denied the blessings of
eternity, simply because some records are lost or unattainable. All will work
out in the end. Sometimes we forget just who is in charge.

lame

July 21, 2009 6:37 p.m.

What's this old article on here for. Give it up!

Stop bawling

July 21, 2009 6:26 p.m.

The Catholic church is the only true church on this earth today rather any one
of you want to admit it or not. Catholics have sacred records as well. Learn to
respect others.

Utah Mormon

July 21, 2009 5:54 p.m.

If the Catholic Church does not want to give their data to the LDS Church who
cares? Jesus Christ himself declared that all will hear his gospel and have the
opportunity to accept him, which I believe is true because what kind of God
hides from man and punishes them if they haven't heard of the name Jesus Christ
and never had the chance?

Nobody should be getting riled up about
this. It's their choice if they don't want to give us the records, we shouldn't
be making a big deal out of it. We should be doing what we can, and doing what
we believe instead of whining, "They won't share." Then if they don't want to
they don't have to! Find other things you could be doing productively instead of
moping about it like a bunch of emo kids.

Emlyn Davis

July 21, 2009 5:41 p.m.

I would like to apologise my family are LDS and I being one I know how important
it is for members. I apologise, I had a bad exp. but that's not an attempt to
excuse or justify my sin and I don't want to tar anyone or an organisation with
my over-reactionary syndrome. Kind of like when someone gives up smoking.

So I sincerely apologise, I don't agree with the practice, but I feel a
bit embarassed that I typed without thinking, so to any LDS reading this who
have read my earlier comment I apologise, to others who are reading this and
haven't read the other, please accept it as someone with way too much caffeine
and anger management.

Thanks

Holy Roman Apostolic Catholic

June 3, 2009 7:35 p.m.

1st: RE-READ the article and understand that what the Catholic Church doesnt
want is LDS missionares or LDS members posing as "genealogists"
mass-microfilming the records it guards. If someone wants a copy of a record,
that person must show legimitate interest, for example being a descendant of the
record in question he or she wishes to obtain. Period, is that simple.

2nd: Yes, the Church does have serious concerns of the destination the
information given is used for. First by publicizing all the info for the sake
of genealogy seems an unthreatening practice, but that info will not only be
available to true genealogists and people with legitimate interest, but also to
many whakos (including the LDS church) who practice for good or for bad
necromancy... and for that, I thank the Pope for protectig the souls of my
ancestors.

3rd: is not a matter of what you find offensive, it is a
matter of what the Catholics or the Jews feel offensive, and that should be
respected. "do unto others as you..."

4th: The Catholic Church is
the only true Church and all you mormons are poor misled heathen. I`ll pray for
you.

Anne in Australia

Oct. 8, 2008 6:45 a.m.

With a mixed Catholic and LDS background it does not offend me when Catholics
have masses said for our relatives when they die. I wish then that they would
not be offended when Temple work is done for the dead as it is only to assist
them to progress and affords those who did not repent in life to re-dedicate
themselves or repent and be baptized, as in Paul to the Corinthians, Else what
shall they do who are Baptized for the Dead if the Dead Rise not at all, maybe
those who complain dont believe there will be a resurrection. I thought all
Catholics and LDS did so cannot each thank the other for the kindly prayers,
Masses and Temple work done in love and concern. Ecumenical understanding was
thought to have replaced bigotry. Maybe it is waking up again.
How Sad.Let us pray for Catholic and LDS unity as they have so much
in common, anti abortion, worship of God The Father, belief in a living Christ
and hope for their own and their loved ones' salvation. What is wrong with that.
Solving whether Rome had the authority from Peter is too long a debate.

Tea

Aug. 24, 2008 5:22 p.m.

I was forced to attend the mormon church when I was young (mother has since left
the church and apologised). I've been a Catholic for over 30 years and still the
mormons show up at my door like I'm going to have some big revelation and
repent. That same persistant arrogance and disrepect when mormons "baptise" the
dead, has resulted in the closure of Catholic records. Good job mormons, you've
ruined it for the rest of us. You reap what you sow.

How interesting....

June 25, 2008 6:25 p.m.

It makes no sense to me: if the Catholic Church believes that LDS practices are
wrong and invalid, why should it matter to them if Mormons want to baptize their
ancestors if they believe it to be an "errounous practice?"

Doug Forbes

May 26, 2008 6:53 p.m.

I can see a law suit in this. The descendant of the deceased may have more right
under the law to the records of their ancestors than any church. The church
doesn't even have to get involved in this. Individuals can sue for information
about their own ancestors.

Bert

May 22, 2008 4:22 p.m.

The Mormon Church has already set a precedence when they agree to not
posthumously baptize any holocaust victim without the approval of an immediate
family member.

They have in essence acknowledged that to do so is
an insult to family members of the deceased.

This courtesy should
be extended to all proxy candidates.

Anonymous

May 18, 2008 5:41 p.m.

We must remember how often Pres Hinckley reminded members of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints to be kind to others of other faiths. I have no
doubt that as our church leaders speak with the Catholic Church things will work
out. It's not always about being right. Sometimes it's about being understanding
before wanting to be understood. The Lord has his ways of moving the work
forward in His own time and in His own way. No one can stop this work from
progressing. It is vital to all, even to those of other faiths, for we are all
children of God. We must not have a holier than thou attitude, but live so that
our lives can open doors, open hearts, and so that the spirit of the Lord may
touch all. This is His work, not ours. We must do it his way. Why should we
worry so much? Our Catholic brothers and sisters believe in their religion just
as much as we do. Lets worry about staying on course in our own lives, for we
are the greatest embassadors of this great and noble work. It is true and it
will not be deterred.

???

May 16, 2008 4:28 p.m.

How can you people compare a baptism to the Catholics lighting a candle or
praying for you?? A baptism is not the same!

Lisa

May 16, 2008 4:14 p.m.

Mark I totally agree with you. I DO NOT want someone baptising me into some
other religion when I am gone whether I believe it works or not....I could just
see other religions baptising Mormons after they are gone. You'd sure see an
outcry. I don't agree with the Catholic Church holding back on information
because of my love for family tree research, but I don't blame them for having
their feathers ruffled.

Kate Baum - Georgia

May 16, 2008 12:12 p.m.

I have spent the last 30 years volunteering as a German, then Gottscheer helper
at my local LDS Family History Center and I spend a week every year in Salt Lake
City doing research for others. I have traveled to Catholic archdioceses in
Europe to get some of my family information and have been rudely treated in some
places. No one is rude to me at the Family History Center. It is certainly less
expensive to drive to my local FHC that fly to Europe. Those are some of the
reason why I love the fact that so many of the records are available through
LDS. I am extremely sorry that my church is being so narrow minded and
"un-ecumenical".

Cliff

May 16, 2008 9:05 a.m.

I'm seeing a lot of posts on here stating that the LDS church would be highly
offended if other church members began "baptizing" for dead LDS members.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Such statements are
simply knee-jerk statements unfounded in logic or truth. No, we would not be
"all over that like white on rice."

Our 11th article of faith states:
"We claim the privilege of worshipping almighty God according to the dictates of
our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege. Let them worsjip how,
where, or what they may."

If someone else wants to perform a post
death ritual on behalf of my deceased ancestor, so be it. It will not be of any
effect, so why should it bother me, or any other church member?

I
fail to see why this would bother anyone who was secure in their own religion?
If the Catholic church really believes the LDS church is in error, what is that
to the Catholics?

Just to add a bit more

May 14, 2008 4:56 p.m.

I meant to say I don't hate Mormons/LDS. My family are still members of the LDS
and I love them but I agree with the point made by the catholic church.

Sue

May 12, 2008 5:31 p.m.

As a devout Mormon who loves Catholics (and other people of various faiths)I am
not offended that Catholics, or any other religions, believe that they have the
only true church. Why would anyone align themselves with a religion that didn't
believe it had the power to save it's members? After my mother-in-law passed
away a few months ago, my Catholic neighbor had her prayed for in special
masses, which will continue for five years. I am very touched by her love and
thoughtfulness. The Catholic Church certainly has the right to do what it wants
with its records but I hope that there will be a way for all religions to
benefit from shared information.

Rebecca

May 12, 2008 1:26 p.m.

I can understand that from the outside this statement could be misinterpreted to
mean that Catholic's don't like Mormons and it is true that it is difficult to
love those who seem different.

However, The Catholic Church was
correct in making this statement for a number of reasons but one which is
important in these times, is that there is popular misconception that all
religions are the same.If they had agreed to give names of the Catholic faithful
this could be misinterpreted as saying Catholic and LDS - the same.

This is not true, the LDS faith has elements of the truth but it is not the
Truth. Christ is the Truth. The Catholic Church is Christ's Church. Which he is
with always to the end of time in the Eucharist and which he promised that the
gates of hell will not prevail against. It is still His Church :)I pray that we
all may grow in the love of Christ. God Bless

Emlyn Davis

May 12, 2008 1:13 p.m.

I'm sorry but I think it's all about example. If when you give information you
know the person is using it in a way that does not match your beliefs or sets an
erroneous example then the Catholic Church has every right to hold such
information back.

Also with regards to the comment known as 'Two
Faced' don't play the game that the LDS is above reproach and innocent. LDS will
do anything to get on tv and look 'Christian' with Helping Hands and other
projects. By the way I'm a Mormon who has become a Catholic so yes I'm probably
warped and anti-Mormon.

Bill

May 11, 2008 9:27 p.m.

The Catholic Church is self-destructing. All we can do is let it go.

To banderson

May 10, 2008 3:02 a.m.

"Some people do research just to find some O'Haras and get together to get drunk
and speak fondly of the "Old country"."

You could have used a
non-Irish surname in your example rather than reinforcing a stereotype.

Barney

May 10, 2008 2:28 a.m.

Erroneous how? asked"Will a Catholic please scripturally explain how
baptism for the dead is erroneous?"

I suggest that you go to a parish
priest and ask, but please ask politely and respectfully.

banderson

May 9, 2008 1:43 p.m.

A sweet thing happened a few years ago when my wife hurt her leg severely. Our
evangelical neighbor lady came over to see my wife. Seeing that she had a hurt
leg she offered to lay hands on her and pray for her to be healed (a New
Testament practice still practiced by some churches).

We LDS lay
hands on people all the time and pray for them -- but it was sure different to
have a neighbor lady offer a similar opportunity. My wife graciously accepted
the offer and the prayer was said. Yes the leg got better.

I would
be happy to have my ancestors baptized in whatever church or sacrificed to
heathen gods or whatever. I won't be offended and I suspect they won't either.
See above to identify who my ancestors are. They are generally your ancestors
-- so knock yourself out if you'd like to.

banderson

May 9, 2008 1:31 p.m.

The effect of us generally "all having the same ancestors" is that we can all
help one another find our common ancestors. Millions of non-LDS benefit each
year by using LDS resources to find their ancestors. Thousands of LDS use
wonderful Non-LDS resources to find ancestors. There is a great cooperative
effort among genealogists.

The information age has exploded the
information available on the Internet and our ability to find our kin and
collaborate with others of our extended family to extend our family lines. There
are various ways information can be shared into the Internet so extended family
can benefit.

Some researchers like to gather information from others
efforts but don't want to share what they have found. That's okay too. Some
people do research just to find some O'Haras and get together to get drunk and
speak fondly of the "Old country". That's okay too.

I may think it
would be harmful to help the O'Haras find their family, get drunk. But I'll
still share my research with them. They're on their own to do with it what they
will.

Everyone has their own reason to search out their kin.
Mormons have theirs. Maybe that's okay too.

banderson

May 9, 2008 1:00 p.m.

"We all share the same ancestors"

I admit that is a rather general
statement understood by many genealogists. Of course I don't share any close
ancestors with someone from Japan.

Here is what I mean. I have 2
parents and 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents, 16 great-great-parents. Pretty
much all of these were LDS. Farther back than these folks nobody was a Mormon
because the Church started in 1830.

I have 32
great-great-great-grandparents, 64 4th great-grandparents and so on back through
the generations -- 128,256,512,1024,2048,4096,8192, 16,384, 33,768, 67,536,
135,072. From this fifth generation back all my family were Methodists,
Catholics, Church of England and probably even Druid from Denmark.

So
the total ancestors I personally have at 17 generations back looks like over
200,000. If each of us had unique ancestors, the 300,000,000 or so inhabitants
of the USA would have 200,000 ancestors each by the 17th generation for a total
of 30 trillion people. I'm quite sure that's more people than have ever lived
on the Earth.

The reality is that as you get back several generations
our family trees become so intertwined with many others that effectively -- "we
all share the same ancestors".

Dear Raymond

May 9, 2008 12:42 p.m.

I was unaware that the Catholics thought the Pope received revelation. Can you
expound on that one and tell us of any revelations the Pope has received?

Because as I understand it, according to Catholics, the day and age of
revelation is over. All we need to know is in the Bible. No need for modern day
revelation...

As for those who are saying that Catholics don't
believe babies go to hell if they aren't baptized, I'd say 90% of the Catholics
I know disagree with you. That's there understanding of the doctrine and I asked
them last night about it.

Arrogant to the extreme?

May 9, 2008 12:40 p.m.

"This is America and no religion has the right to tell anther religion what they
can and cannnot believe. It's arrogant to the extreme."-----------------

What's arrogant to the extreme is to do something
just because you can regardless of the wishes of the living relatives of the
dead. Even if your culture is to ignore the sensitivities of others and stand in
judgement of all you survey, you can still stand back and reassess ....

Re: Indiana Genealogist

May 9, 2008 12:29 p.m.

Referring to your temple work as renewing vows is misleading. The validity of
the original marriage vows always remain intact. In your explanation, do you
tell people of other faiths that the LDS Church does not accept the validity of
the original baptism?

banderson

May 9, 2008 12:20 p.m.

As a doctor in Illinois I can share that medical records are the joint property
of the patients (and their legal descendants)and the doctor who is required by
law to keep a record of treatment.

When a patient choses to change
doctors a copy needs to be made so both parties have a copy. Some offices
charge. We don't.

I don't know that the medical records are a good
comparison with 200 year old birth records held by a church. For whatever
purposes the Catholic Church particularly has done a wonderful job over the
years of recording births marriages and deaths -- often far earlier than
governments made such records.

You could argue that like medical
records the descendants have a "right" to the records of their ancestors but
really if there is no legal requirement established by the government to provide
those records to descendants -- it's left to the church to make up whatever
policy it wants regarding release of their records.

The Catholic
Church is less centrally directed than the LDS Church. Many parishes in the
past have chosen to cooperate in the filming and preservation of their records,
others have not. Now we'll see.

Why Mad at LDS?

May 9, 2008 11:43 a.m.

'Just some thought' said: "Why do people get so mad about the LDS? Many people
of other faiths try to convert me, like evangelicals, Jehovah's Witnesses, or
even hare Krishnas. It is a matter of 5 seconds to say, 'no thanks, I'm not
interested.' What's the big deal?"

The vast majority of Christians do
not go to the homes or ring the doorbells of other Christians to tell them they
belong to a false religion. Who has ever heard of Methodist missionaries doing
this to Lutherans, or Catholics to Presbyterians. How can the vast majority of
the 2 billion Christians in the world accept Mormons as fellow Christians under
these circumstances. This LDS practice breeds distrust and dislike and is
considered disrespectful and intrusive.

JOT2779

May 9, 2008 10:17 a.m.

The vast majority of these comments ignore the fundamental issues: what "right"
do people have to these records? And isn't it the SOLE prerogative of the
Catholic Church to decide which of HER records it decides to protect? Would any
of you be offended if I declined to provide you my latest payroll statement? If
so, on what basis? That's the thing--there's no basis for your "beef" with the
Catholic Church's decision.

Indiana Genealogist

May 9, 2008 9:35 a.m.

I know a Roman Catholic couple who had been married for several years, who had a
ceremony by their priest to "renew" their "vows." The RC church apparently
approves of re-doing its "sacrament" (what LDS call an ordinance) of marriage
for living couples who are still married. People in other Christian
denominations also do this.

I'm a convert of 31 years (formerly RC).
When people of any denomination ask me about temple work, I liken it to the
custom of "renewing vows." They seem to accept that concept.

Sam Schmitt

May 9, 2008 9:01 a.m.

Julie,

Maybe this will help - just because the Catholic Church
doesn't believe in baptism of the dead, that doesn't mean the it thinks it's
harmless to the one who attempts to do it. So the RCC does not want to cooperate
in any way in the practice, not because it harms the dead (as you correctly
point out, the RCC doesn't believe it has any real effect), but because the RCC
does not want to have any part of a practice which it considers false.

What if you were asked by a Catholic friend the names of your Mormon
friends so that he could pray to Mary for them. I think it is very
understandable that you would not want to do this. If he then said to you, "Why
not? You don't believe in prayer to Mary anyway, so what's the big deal?" Well,
I can see why you would still refuse, not because you think his praying to Mary
would actually "do" anything, but because you wouldn't want to cooperate in his
praying to Mary, since you think this is a false practice.

That's
what's going on here. It's really not that hard to figure out.

AJ

May 9, 2008 8:57 a.m.

To spoiled child

First of all, the LDS Church already has many
records for the World to share. This new policy from Rome, will not slow down
the work at all.

Mormons will accept the Catholic ban, this is
not a new policy, it's been done before and it's being done again. Who's the
spoiled child, by taking their ball and going home?

What is
unacceptable to Mormons is the notion of the Catholic Church stating "we will
stop the Mormons from practicing baptism for the dead."Ain't gonna
happen.

This is America and no religion has the right to tell anther
religion what they can and cannnot believe. It's arrogant to the extreme.

Keep your records if you will, burn them if you will, but, rest assured
that if the Mormons find family histories, "THEY PRESERVE THEM FOR THE WORLD TO
SHARE, AND TREAT THEM AS THE SACRED DOCUMENTS, THEY ARE.

I do work at
the Family History Library, I run into people of all Faiths and from all over
the World.The LDS Church isn't involved in "aversion therapy" trying to
dictate to another faith what they can and cannot believe.

All are
welcome.

Re: Re: To Again | 10:38 p.m.

May 9, 2008 8:49 a.m.

>>You might see the doctrine in that light, but that is not the way the doctrine
is taught or practiced in the Catholic Church as a whole. Baptism of infants, as
explained to me by a Catholic priest in Argentina, is to cleanse the infants of
the "Original Sin" caused by Adam and Eve. Mormon doctrine/philosophy teaches
that the "original sin" of Adam and Eve, though necessary, does not taint each
person born into this world and that "men shall be punished for their own sins,
and not for Adam's transgressions

Spoiled Child

May 9, 2008 12:03 a.m.

A spoiled child thinks it has the right to get whatever it wants and is offended
when told 'no'. When spoiled children get smart, in order to get what they want
they use any which excuse they can to get around whatever reasoning the parent
gives them. What this article is basically saying is that the Mormon Church
should have the right to Catholic diocesan records but that the Catholic Church
shouldn't really have the right to deny its access - or that at least the
excuses the Church is giving isn't good enough or is lacking. The Church has
rights to those records but that isn't good enough - because the Mormon Church
WANTS THEM! NOW! What a bunch of whiny, spoiled little children.

Re: Re: Re: To Again

May 8, 2008 11:25 p.m.

From the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" -- 1261 As regards children who have
died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as
she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who
desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children
which caused him to say: 'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,' (MK
10"14;cf. 1 Tim 2:4), allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for
children who have died without Baptism..."

What about

May 8, 2008 11:25 p.m.

simple respect. Why is it the LDS church is so offended that the Catholic church
won't give it records? Why does the LDS church fell it is their right to have
them? Why does the LDS church believe it's their right to do "proxy" baptisms?
How about a little respect, the same respect I would afford you.

Re: Re: To Again

May 8, 2008 10:38 p.m.

Pope Benedict XVI might have something else to say about the matter. I respect
the man for his refreshing policy against what he terms "relativism". You might
see the doctrine in that light, but that is not the way the doctrine is taught
or practiced in the Catholic Church as a whole. Baptism of infants, as explained
to me by a Catholic priest in Argentina, is to cleanse the infants of the
"Original Sin" caused by Adam and Eve. Mormon doctrine/philosophy teaches that
the "original sin" of Adam and Eve, though necessary, does not taint each person
born into this world and that "men shall be punished for their own sins, and not
for Adam's transgressions."

Re: To Again | 4:47 p.m.

May 8, 2008 8:24 p.m.

Some real misunderstandings here!

Catholics believe that those who
know about and believe in the sacrament of baptism must receive it. Official
doctrine with respect to infants who have not been baptized, is that we have no
clear teaching. The belief is that infants will attain heaven as God accepts
each of us unless we have rejected Him by living in serious sin.

Infants are not baptized because they are viewed as sinful or unclean.
Baptism sets up a new relationship with God for all of us who are born into a
world that has been affected by inherent human weakness. It's a rite to welcome
the child into the Christian community, but it is up to the parents and/or
sponsors to see that the childs religious education follows.

Similarly, adults who desire baptism, were repentant and accepted God, but
died before being baptized are saved through grace. Those who may not have had
an opportunity to accept a personal God through no fault of their own, but are
committed to following their conscience, also receive Gods grace-presence.

The Church does not believe heaven is reserved just for Catholics, and
believe that God's judgement is always fair and loving.

EndIgnorance

May 8, 2008 5:33 p.m.

"The idea that a child who died in youth is going to Hell for not having
Christian parents"

What sort of bigoted mythology do they teach you??
That's not a Catholic doctrine!

To Again

May 8, 2008 4:47 p.m.

"To put it simply, infant baptism is a "we welcome this child into the Christian
community rite."

Then what is the entire "purgatory" thing all
about?

The idea that a child who died in youth is going to Hell for
not having Christian parents is not a Christian doctrine.

G

May 8, 2008 4:44 p.m.

"That is exactly why the Roman Catholic Church chooses to protect the faith and
avoid participating in heretical practices, even if it means making a few
Mormons angry."

But what I don't understand is why so many think the
LDS church should abandon proxy baptism to make Catholics and Jewish groups
happy. Their opinions should be irrelevant.

To G 3:30 pm

May 8, 2008 4:28 p.m.

That is exactly why the Roman Catholic Church chooses to protect the faith and
avoid participating in heretical practices, even if it means making a few
Mormons angry.

To Again:

May 8, 2008 4:20 p.m.

To put it simply, infant baptism is a "we welcome this child into the Christian
community rite." It is at an older age when these children make an adult
commitment to Christ through either a "born again" experience (evangelical
protestants), or a First Communion experience (Catholics and mainstream
protestants) after studying and discerning.

RE:RE:RE: Erroneous how?

May 8, 2008 4:20 p.m.

"...How unjust would it be to condemn the millions of Gods children to hell
because they did not have the opportunity to hear the gospel while they lived in
the flesh. Of all born again philosophies, this saddens me the most..."

It is sad indeed that people hear the Gospel and turn from it. As for those
that 'have not heard the Gospel', we cannot know the provision that Almighty God
has made for them, although we are told in scripture that all of creation is a
witness to God, even the heathen knows right from wrong because of this.Anything that the Lord does is 'just'; who are we to question the design of
Almighty God? We who are filthy sinners without hope, save for the grace of God
and the atoning blood of Jesus Christ? Was The Flood, that killed nearly all who
lived on the world 'unjust'? There are many examples throughout scripture that
to the modern, human mind seem harsh, but God loves us and has always given us
the knowledge required to escape sin and penalty; the Bible says nothing of
second chances after death. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Believing Unbeliever

May 8, 2008 3:47 p.m.

Yes, I'm an believing unbeliever; I believe we ought to engage in dialog
concerning morality and whether or not a believe in a supernatural man makes you
as a believer morally superior person by this very fact. As someone without
religion and knowing family who are Christian, my conclusion that that religious
belief does not make grant anyone religious supremacy. We know this to be the
case if we open to people of all kinds during our day to day experience.
Experiencing morality among people transcends all religions. Unfortunately, the
problem begins with religious people often prefer their dogma over real
people.

I believe morality is innate, that we all have the ability to
agree on a moral system if we put aside religious authority, both person and
scripture. This entire discussion about baptism is an example of where
religions fail; in this light, when looking at the years and years of violence
and destruction in the name of God, regard the conflict in this thread as an
microcosm of the attitudes capable of full out war. Call it a tiny seed.

G

May 8, 2008 3:33 p.m.

"And he might have been driven out of Utah, too. Unfortunately, this issue,
along with the FLDS issue, is going to cause great hardship to the LDS Church
and its recruiting efforts in the years to come."

I
thought one of the tenets of the religion was that God ran the church, and not
some public relations department.

If it wanted, the LDS church could
get LOTS of converts--just by changing doctrine sufficiently to be attractive to
post-modern sensibility. We can drop the tithe and worthiness interviews. We
could teach that there are many ways to truth and that different morals apply to
different people, and that God doesn't expect anything of anyone.

Ask nothing, and tell people what they want to hear and the chapels will be
full. This is a debate the Catholic church has been having too, isn't it?

If you think that's a good idea, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Again

May 8, 2008 3:25 p.m.

I ask the question because I don't understand, why are infants baptized into the
church if they have no cognitive ability to make this choice? Isn't this a
"forcing" just like the complaining on this board is? If someone could just
explain the baby baptism and why it's done at such a young age?

RE: RE: Erroneous how?

May 8, 2008 3:24 p.m.

I shouldn't waste my time on 'born again doctrine, but....

1
Corinthians 15:29 - The Corinthian members were beginning to dispute the reality
of the resurrection. He was pointing out that baptizing the dead would have no
meaning if the resurrection were not real.

The Bible, as does the
BofM, teach that those who hear the gospel preached while in mortality should 1)
accept it, and 2) once accept it, live it.

How unjust would it be to
condemn the millions of Gods children to hell because they did not have the
opportunity to hear the gospel while they lived in the flesh. Of all born again
philosophies, this saddens me the most.

RE: you might not care

May 8, 2008 2:44 p.m.

"...The Baptists have a missionary program called the Great Commission, which
targets LDS members as potential converts..."

Actually all Christians
have a 'missionary program' called The Great Commission; it is found in the
Bible,given in Matthew chapter 28, verses 19-20, "Therefore go and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have
commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

This instruction was given by Jesus Christ to the apostles and all who
followed them (Christians) to preach and teach what Jesus Christ has shown us in
the scriptures and through the power of the Holy Spirit. We are instructed to
evangelize to all unbelievers, all over the world. As Baptists, we believe that
we are all 'missionaries' for Jesus Christ. Although many do, one doesn't have
to go around the world or even around the country or attend an institutionalized
program to preach and teach to unbelievers; all of us can look around in our own
neighborhoods, where we work, every where we go and see unbelievers.

Records

May 8, 2008 2:41 p.m.

"And you don't own the records."

From G: "Really? What records did
Jewish groups hold over the church to get them to abandon proxy baptism? -- Who
cares. We're talking about the Catholic Church here.

"Brigham Young
would not have tolerated this." -- And he might have been driven out of Utah,
too. Unfortunately, this issue, along with the FLDS issue, is going to cause
great hardship to the LDS Church and its recruiting efforts in the years to
come. Disrespecting Catholic folks in this way -- and on this forum -- is not a
smart move.

G

May 8, 2008 12:56 p.m.

"Ever try to get your personal medical records from the doctor?"

It's
interesting that you mention that. I did this morning. No fee, no problem.

I can understand the Catholic Church's position on this matter.
But privacy issues for people that lived a long time ago are different from
those of the living. Especially when the family is involved.

Even
the FBI can be petitioned to release surveillance files on people that have died
at least 20 years ago, if a sufficient historical interest can be proven. And if
you lived a really long time ago, anthropologists won't hesitate to dig up your
grave, make a mockery of your religious beliefs, and put you in a museum. All
with no outcry. than that.

Religion

May 8, 2008 12:56 p.m.

Wow! There are over 700 comments about this topic. When there are events in
the real world needing attention, so many of you are discussing beliefs that
aren't based on the real world.

I do not see how religion helps
people. Doesn't it just create conflict? If there is a dispute about
something in the real world, we can actually make reference to the world as we
know it. Belief in things that can't be tested as real and talking in tones of
certainty about them gets us nowhere.

Records ownership

May 8, 2008 12:47 p.m.

Organizations own records. You don't even "own" your records. Ever try to get
your personal medical records from the doctor? They won't hand them over to
you. They will copy your records for you--for a fee.

Re: You might not care...

May 8, 2008 12:08 p.m.

"Hypothetically, if the Baptists were to initiate a publicly known, church-wide
program whereby they used LDS Church membership records to baptize by proxy all
LDS members; you can guarantee LDS Church leaders would have something to say
about it. You might not *care*, but there is no doubt that action would be
condemned at the highest levels of the Church, and access to the records the
Baptists were using would be denied."

I still wouldn't care, since,
again, all they would have to do is use a phone book to get names for ordnances.
Or our own resources.

But there are a few subtle assumptions in your
analogy that need to be pointed out.

(1) In your analogy latter-day
saints are being specifically targeted because only of our religion, by a
specific church we've had problems with. In proxy baptism, every non-LDS person
is targeted. It is not a campaign specifically organized against Catholics.

(2) In your analogy the recipients are still alive. I think there
is a difference between my Catholic ancestors 300 years ago and the current LDS
member rolls. Specifically, it raises the question of whether or not the
Catholics *own* my ancestors.

Thomas

May 8, 2008 11:52 a.m.

No religion should claim veto power over what another religion's adherents do in
the privacy of their own churches.

You might not care...

May 8, 2008 11:42 a.m.

I dont think LDS individuals would *care* if someone was baptizing them by proxy
to another faith because they believe it holds not authority, but lets be
realistic. The Baptists have a missionary program called the Great Commission,
which targets LDS members as potential converts. Hypothetically, if the
Baptists were to initiate a publicly known, church-wide program whereby they
used LDS Church membership records to baptize by proxy all LDS members; you can
guarantee LDS Church leaders would have something to say about it. You might
not *care*, but there is no doubt that action would be condemned at the highest
levels of the Church, and access to the records the Baptists were using would be
denied.

records

May 8, 2008 11:19 a.m.

Records belong to organizations. Ever try going to a doctor and getting your
own medical records? They won't just hand them over to you, but they will copy
them--for a price.

Tiago

May 8, 2008 10:39 a.m.

I think those records belong to their ancestors as much as they do to the
Catholic Church.

G

May 8, 2008 10:12 a.m.

"Why is everything nowadays seen as disrespectful? The same goes for baptism for
the dead. "

Because we live in a society that worships political
correctness.

G

May 8, 2008 10:02 a.m.

"I wonder if the LDS would mind giving me their dead ancestors names so I
can sacrifice their blood to Baal by proxy?

Shouldn't matter to them.
LDS don't think a sacrifice to Baal has any meaning."

Personally, I wouldn't care. You can get names out of a phone book and
practice whatever ordnance you want all day long. If it does no physical harm,
where is the problem?

G

May 8, 2008 9:59 a.m.

"From G: "They don't own the temples." And you don't own the records."

Really? What records did Jewish groups hold over the church to get them to
abandon proxy baptism? None.

We live in a society where people use
"offense" as political capital. Let them be offended. Brigham Young would not
have tolerated this.

Jim E

May 8, 2008 9:33 a.m.

Most LDS are saying that Christians dont believe Mormon baptism has any meaning
so why should Christians care.

I wonder if the LDS would mind giving
me their dead ancestors names so I can sacrifice their blood to Baal by
proxy?

Shouldn't matter to them. LDS don't think a sacrifice to Baal
has any meaning.

Raymond A.

May 8, 2008 8:37 a.m.

The Pope of the Holy Catholic church is a prophet of the true God and he acts in
accord with communion through prayer and revelations, he is not acting on a
personal preference but because he is directed by our Lord. We hope others will
understand and respect this rule of holy law given with our love and good will.

Actually..

May 8, 2008 8:03 a.m.

There are many things in the Bible that very few Christian religions ignore.
For example, no one stones their children to death for disobedience as god in
the Bible command.

If you decide to read the Bible without
religious authority looking over your shoulder to make sure you read their way,
you'll find that the Bible is full of the worst form of morality around, acts
that would make Stalin proud.

Religion is all about picking and
choosing passages that support their dogma and conveniently ignoring the immoral
god parts and then claiming that the Bible is the word of some supernatural
person.

It's time to drop religion all together.

Just some thoughts

May 8, 2008 5:55 a.m.

Why do people get so mad about the LDS? Frequently people of other faiths try to
convert me, like Evangelicals, Jehovah's Witnesses or even Hare Krishnas. It is
a matter of 5 seconds to say "No thanks, I'm not interested". What's the big
deal? Why is everything nowadays seen as disrespectful? The same goes for
baptism for the dead. As long as you didn't have a relationship with a
particular person, how can you say that he/she would feel harassed? Most of them
lived hundreds of years ago. How could anyone here be their spokesperson?

To those who refer to scriptures in the Bible to prove or disprove
things I would say, that there are a lot of things that Christian churches do
today (LDS and Non-LDS) that is not based on specific commandments or clear
guidelines of the Bible.

One last thing-- If you think LDS are being
disrespectful, you better not be someone who ever thought or said: "I'll pray
for you, erronous Mormon!", because that, according to your thinking, is
disrespectful, too.

RE: Erroneous how?

May 8, 2008 12:56 a.m.

"...please scripturally explain how baptism for the dead is erroneous?..."

Paul used first-person pronouns throughout 1 Corinthians referring to
himself and the believers, then changes to 'they' in 15:29. Clearly he was
referring to an erroneous practice. Paul's style of argument and exposition made
frequent use of examples; this is clearly one of those examples, saying, if they
don't believe in an afterlife, why do they bother with baptizing the dead?
Furthermore, it is mentioned only in that one place in the Bible, without
further reference, and without any associated commands or guidelines.Were
it a practice that was condoned, it would have been mentioned elsewhere along
with further guidelines.

Nothing in the BoM supports baptism for the dead,
which claims to contain "the fulness of the everlasting gospel."

Shane

May 7, 2008 11:19 p.m.

We DO NOT ALL share the same ancestors. The LDS are far less than 1% of the
worlds population and so the other 99.x+% of us would appreciate the respect of
not harassing our ancestors in the after life nor trying to convert us in the
here and now!

banderson

May 7, 2008 9:56 p.m.

harry C I understand the Catholic Church has for decades welcomed the
filming and preservation of their records by the LDS Church. I suspect that in
the past it was not perceived by them as conspiring with heretics. If that
perception has changed, they can of course pay others in the future to preserve
their records for them.

Unfortunately many churches and other
holders of valuable genealogical records have a hard time finding the
substancial sums necessary to microfilm their records. Their money is spent for
other worthy causes.

Fortunately for record preservation, the LDS
Church has been willing to spend huge sums of money to provide filming services
to record holders at no cost.

For instance, in Europe some records
were filmed before churches were destroyed in World War II. In New Orleans there
had been opposition to LDS filming for decades. Finally, recently, permission
was granted and an LDS film crew was operating when Katrina hit.

We
all share the same ancestors. As the LDS find our ancestors and preserve their
histories we freely share that information with the world because many have
those same ancestors. We invite the world to share with us -- and many do.

Truth

May 7, 2008 9:44 p.m.

Reading the bulk of the posts here, I've come to the conclusion that many
representing the LDS faith simply cannont comprehend the following:

1. No amount of explaining doctrine about baptism for dead is going to make it
acceptable to most. Honoring their privacy and religion should be foremost.

2. Many people simply don't believe yours is the "True Church." No
offense but try to understand.

3. You believe your work in baptisms
and geneology is the "Lord's work." Other religions place no emphasis on this;
no disrespect meant but this may be incomprehensible to many.

I
believe many of your intentions are good but please respect the feelings of
other religions. Last, to LDS members who understand 1-3 and spoke out on this
forum urging religious freedom and tolerance, you've broken down 1 stereotype I
had about LDS religion...thank you

Thomas

May 7, 2008 9:25 p.m.

The Kneebiters are fictional and folklore in mormon history. Anyone who has
posted here on actual events involving these creatures are just very, very ill
informed. It actually has a very negative connotation as represented in the US
version of the book Hitchikers Guide to The Galaxy. I am not sure we want our
folklore associated with that connotation.

very sad

May 7, 2008 9:25 p.m.

I am new to blogging, just trying to make a positive contribution. When I read
stuff like this, I wonder it it's worth it. I am so brought down by the
sarcasm, the name-calling, negativity and bitterness. Wow. I believe it was
Christ who warned us where the "spirit of contention" comes from - and it is he
who is the source of all contention that I see emerging as the only "victor"
here. I happen to be a Latter Day Saint. I am very sad about the above types
of communication here by members of my faith. I apologize for them. Very sad
also that others choose to "throw the baby out with the bath water" and dismiss
any faith because the members are imperfect. Show me a church full of perfect
people? Please? I invite any to read the most up-to-date words of our leaders
(try General Conference reports on lds.org) and see if we do truly teach about
respect and tolerance and love for all others. The Catholics have the right to
do whatever they like with their records. Please - the enemy is hate - not each
other.

Anonymous

May 7, 2008 9:21 p.m.

I would figure our lord would be able to keep track of our geneolgy and would
accept good and kind people no matter what ordinances have occured. If indeed he
is our father in heaven and we are all his children then does this all really
matter and are we just making are lives more complicated?

Papal Assistant

May 7, 2008 9:20 p.m.

John Lambert | 12:12 p.m. May 7, 2008 If the Catholic Churh would let the
LDS Church microfilm the records, then the LDS church would give them a copy of
the microfilm, all free.__________

John, the Pope would like to
speak with you on this offer STAT!

Erroneous how?

May 7, 2008 9:02 p.m.

Will a Catholic please scripturally explain how baptism for the dead is
erroneous?

I'd love to get a response on this question.

Can anyone answer it for me?

Lucillia

May 7, 2008 8:51 p.m.

Hey, ajarizona | 7:09 p.m. May 7, 2008Hoping your post about placing an
embargo on goods associated with Catholisism is a joke and hoping your pointing
out all of the favors done by LDS church is just an immature kid. Blackmailing
Catholic Church for respecting the privacy of it's members is the funniest joke
yet on this thread

SKH

May 7, 2008 8:47 p.m.

As I visit the Family History Library in Salt Lake City, I see as many
non-"Mormons" doing research as I see members. Genealogy is the #1 hobby
throughout the world. Record keeping has been aided by churches, individuals,
and local governments for centuries. I don't want my Catholic
relatives to be kept hidden...nor my Quaker, Methodist, or any other religion.
We are one eternal family...not one eternal family minus Catholics.
Catholics can do any of their ordinances they want on my relatives. Let's be a
record-keeping people.

A little info.....

May 7, 2008 8:25 p.m.

for those who asked..

The Kneebiter was hunted and exterminated in
the mid 1890's. It was a terrible plague to the farms in the Intermountain West
but through faith and perseverance our forefathers were able to overcome. Some
of the posts here are just sad and wrong but I thought I would give my knowledge
on this predatory insect since there was some light interest in the name. Now
you should all try to get along enjoy the evening instead of spreading hatred.

Thomas

May 7, 2008 8:00 p.m.

"Christian love between the churches/Seemed the twin of heathen hate."

re: ajarizona

May 7, 2008 7:55 p.m.

Utah sounds to be a very hostile environment. I have spent a great deal of time
in Arizona and did not find it to be unsafe. Do Christian churches in Utah
require the use to security guards to protect their parishioners from the local
people, or do the local people allow other faiths to worship without
harrassment?

Andrew

May 7, 2008 7:53 p.m.

Nice comments on kneebiters. I don't think they excist as relatives of the
mormon crickets, my grandmother tried to scare me with them when I was young and
visited her in Provo but I hadn't heard the term in years. I can still remember
her saying somthing along the lines of "let's get ready to go to the meeting
house or i'll leave you here to fend for yourself against the kneebiters." wow
bring back some childhood recollections. nice post among some of the rude
comments.

Sis

May 7, 2008 7:48 p.m.

Hey everyone, Here is my idea...

Why don't we use our right to bear
our testimonies and our opinions and write the Vatican each personally instead
of beating each other up here on this board?

Re: ajarizona

May 7, 2008 7:45 p.m.

I don't think the catholic church makes capital purchases, which you have
stated, from the mormon church.

Our two churches are structured vary
different and fund raising is vary different and it is much appreciated the
donation (although I think you are overstating) to the remodel of the
Cathedral.

In the larger scheme I detect much bitterness and
resentment. I will pray for you and your understanding of the percepective of
our two religions.

To: ajarizona

May 7, 2008 7:31 p.m.

Your little church pales in comparison to the roman catholic church both in size
and stature; furthermore your veiled threat on rome is pretty insignificant. You
AZ mormons have gotten a little annoying in the past few months.

ajarizona

May 7, 2008 7:09 p.m.

Memo to all Catholics and the Cathedral of the Madeline.

The LDS
Church politely asks you to return the Million dollars donated to you by us to
restore your Cathedral in the early nineties. We're sure it's now filthy lucre
in your eyes.

However, many thanks to you from the Tab Choir for
singing at the re-dedication of said Cathedral. We suppose they won't be playing
that gig, any time soon.

Also, we have sent directives to all the
Bishops Store Houses and all Mormons involved in Commerce,

As not
sell or do business with any Catholics, who might use items in their religious
services that we as Mormons may not agree with.

Some examples but not
limited to....

1-Metals, gold etc.. This may used to fashion a cross
or crucifix, which Mormons can't support.

2-Grains and Grapes which
may be used for the Eucharist and Transubtantiation. Can't buy into this
doctrine, sorry.

3-Water or bird baths, which may be used for infant
baptism. Again, in direct conflict with Mormon teachings.

4-Beads of
any sort. These could find their way into a Rosary, and Mormons don't believe in
counting ones prayers with beads.

It's a dangerous road, Rome.

To: PJ

May 7, 2008 7:08 p.m.

Can I use your words as an example of extremism in this community? ... or is
this kind of thinking just simmering below the surface.

Human
relations 101. If one wants to understand how one is occurring in the world.
Look out there for the measure ... of course if one doesn't care, then why
publicly ask how some practice could possibly be considered offensive?

sis

May 7, 2008 7:04 p.m.

My inlaws are huge devote catholics. They had reservations about FH but after
15 years of seeing no damage done, they are excited about it and helping! This
decree will stop a huge movement of FH of all peoples. So much family info has
be hidden by local churches during times of war and those are the only records
avaiable to verify any info (Bless those brave people)! I come from holocaust
history and I am so grateful for any info that ever come available to me...I
desire to know my people. Why would anyone want to keep that info from me?
that is not a christian act. Seems that it would be more christ like to keep
the children safe from being victimized than guarding the typed and handwritten
names of my family. they're hiding the wrong stuff, child abusers get protected
and families get destroyed. It isn't the FH that is destroying the diocese.
BTW I respect my catholic family and do not do anything they disagree with.
Respect is all that is needed. There is nothing to fear here.

Re: To answer the question |6:18

May 7, 2008 6:35 p.m.

Actually the kneebiter is found in is found in all 29 counties of utah and parts
of idaho, arizona, nevada and california as well as a smattering of other
locals.

jonny mac

May 7, 2008 6:25 p.m.

To No longer interested...

Good riddance!

jonny mac

To answer the question...

May 7, 2008 6:18 p.m.

Posted by Knee Biter |5:59

A kneebiter is a variation of the mormon
cricket and is found in Garfield and Sanpete Counties.

PJ

May 7, 2008 6:20 p.m.

PJ, you sound like a card-carrying member of the Ku Klux Klan. Same talking
points and all.

Roger

May 7, 2008 6:13 p.m.

I am sure the Pope prayed about his decision and he is following that counsel he
received.

pj

May 7, 2008 6:12 p.m.

Do the people posting here have the slightest clue of World History and
events?

As one reads all the posts here, it is evident that most
people are not teachable or capable of understanding.

Since when have
the Catholics not stated that every doctrine which does not comply with their's,
is heresy?

Just don't give the Catholic authorites anymore wood or
matches, we know how they dealt with heretics in days gone by.

I
have an ancestor, Mother of 5, hanged as a witch by the Puritans. I've also had
direct ancestors burned at the stake by the Catholic Fathers.

The
Catholics can have the same agreement as the Jews, no baptisms unless family
members do them. Which is the case now anyway.

The greatest arrogance
in all of this is not the records ban, on only one group of people, the very
essence of the definition of discrimination, but another Faith telling another,
what it can and cannot believe.

Does this German Pope want to hearken
to the past, and a time when freedom of religion was heretical and opposition
was met with a painful death?

Keep your records, but stay out of
others Faith.

pj

Knee Biter

May 7, 2008 5:59 p.m.

Before this forum ends, I would still like to know what it is the LDS are
referring to when using the term "knee biter." I have never heard that term
before. Thank you.

To old mormon

May 7, 2008 5:57 p.m.

I think the key word was "Catholic" hospital. It was a Chospital. You should
expect something "Catholic" to go on in a "Catholic" hospital. Just as I would
expect something LDS to happen in an LDS facility. By the way, the Catholic
church no longer does this.Just like the kids that go to Catholic schools
and question why they have to go to mass.

It's called mutual
respect!!!!!

To Everyone Calm Down

May 7, 2008 5:44 p.m.

This is about mutual respect. The members of the LDS church want the same
respect given to the other christian churches (yes I am accepting their claim of
being christian). For this to happen the LDS church need to respect the non-LDS
religions. Being Catholic I do feel that if my deceased father is baptised
by proxy into the LDS church his religious history has been defile and
desicrated. This shows complete lack of respect for our religion.

old mormon

May 7, 2008 5:32 p.m.

at various catholic hospitals they used to baptize ALL babies to insure
salvation, my son was baptized there, i have always been lds, but was not
offended by this, because i recognized it as an act of love, the same is true of
the practice of baptisms for the dead

Everyone calm down

May 7, 2008 4:17 p.m.

Perfect love casteth out all fear.

Catholics must understand that
Mormons are a little confused by the "offense" taken where none is intended.
Mormons would not be "offended" by rites done on their behalf.

Mormons must understand that some non-LDS people may be offended by the
practice of vicarious baptism for dead ancestors (by proxy). I bet some of those
who are offended probably don't understand that the ordinance is not being
forced on anyone.

Mormons believe the deceased have the choice to
accept or reject the baptism done on their behalf.

John Lambert

May 7, 2008 3:31 p.m.

I will say again this is a short sighted policy. As people have pointed out
the LDS Church has accepted restriction on the accessibility of microfilmed
records. Blanket stopping of the microfilming of church records will hinder
family history research. No one is saying that the Vatican and the
Catholic Church can not do this, we are saying that as far as we understand the
policy is misguided and narrow minded and hurts the preservation of records and
all forms of historical inquiry.

records

May 7, 2008 2:34 p.m.

From G: "They don't own the temples." And you don't own the records.

G

May 7, 2008 1:18 p.m.

"Unbelievable arrogance and quite offensive to faithful Catholics. Please do not
try to defend the Church in this manner, you are only justifying the negative
perceptions that other people already have."

I've yet to see why
Mormons should abandon a tenet of the faith in order to appease another group.
Let them be offended. They don't own the temples.

G

May 7, 2008 1:03 p.m.

"If the Church is right then it won't matter if Catholics prevent the Church
from baptizing Catholics for the dead since they would understand that our
doctrine allows us to do so in the millenium so it would be logical to have us
wait."

I've heard a few things from church leaders about proxy
baptisms, and "wait" isn't one of them.

Re: John Lambert

May 7, 2008 12:48 p.m.

>>This is extremely stupid on the part of the Vatican.

not catholic or mormon

May 7, 2008 12:40 p.m.

Well said "Catholic convert from LDS"

It should not be so hard to
understand for the Mormons.

God Bless!

Catholic Convert from LDS

May 7, 2008 12:27 p.m.

John L. > Keep you microfilm, you miss the point!

1. Catholics think
their baptism is valid!2. Mormons think their baptism is valid!3.
Mormons think they can correct the invalid baptism of dead Catholics4.
Catholics find this offensive.

What's so hard to understand?

God Bless!

John Lambert

May 7, 2008 12:26 p.m.

To May 5th at 1:17 PM. The LDS Church is currently in the process of
digetizing and indexing records so that many records will be available from the
web at no cost. For those who think that it is anti-Catholic to claim
this is about money, the only person I have ever heard claim that the Archbishop
of Detroit was just after the money was a Catholic who goes to church every
week.

John Lambert

May 7, 2008 12:12 p.m.

If the Catholic Churh would let the LDS Church microfilm the records, then the
LDS church would give them a copy of the microfilm, all free. This would mean
people would no longer have to look through the old records and the information
would be preserved forever.

not mormon or catholic

May 7, 2008 11:39 a.m.

I can understand where the Catholics are coming from. Yes, they don't believe in
or agree with baptisms for the dead, that is the point. It is totally offensive
in my opinion. It was offensive for the Jewish faith and it is offensive for any
faith. Not to mention it's weird and not biblical.

Brothers and sisters

May 7, 2008 11:00 a.m.

Please, please stop calling people stupid, etc. and be careful what you say.

We need to show love. This is what Christ taught. Truth will prevail.

John Lambert

May 7, 2008 10:34 a.m.

To Orion: There is access to non-LDS people on New Family Search. One
of my colleges at the Family History who is not a member has access to New
Family Search.

HarryC

May 7, 2008 10:32 a.m.

bandersonWhat you're saying is that it's worth it to throw your principles
to the wind for a few free microfilms. Get this

To Catholics,
posthumous baptism is heresy. Heresy is the worst sin anyone can commit within
the Catholic Church, equivalent to treason, grounds for excommunication, and
guaranteeing eternal suffering. Yet what you, and all the others on this forum,
expect is that the Pope and all Catholic priests should turn over their
sacramental records, knowing full well that they will be used for what they
consider to be heretical purposes. In other words, they should facilitate
heresy in exchange for a few microfilmed records. As someone else already
noted, that's a Faustian bargain.

Nice one totally self-centered.
It's all about you and what you believe and want, with no respect for others
beliefs.

The FHL isn't the only organization capable of microfilming
or digitizing records. If Catholics wanted their records preserved, there are
hundreds of others qualified to do that.

Eduardo

May 7, 2008 9:53 a.m.

The Catholic Church's records are private. It has the right to do with them as
it chooses.

John Lambert

May 7, 2008 9:41 a.m.

To those who do not understand Bapitsm for the dead. It is a vicarious
ordinance that is done for the benefit of the deceased. It is not done on the
body of the dead, so it is not an issue of desecration. In the afterlife
you still have the choice. If one of your relatives does the temple work for
you you still have the full right to reject it. We are just giving people who
did not have the full opportunity to accept the gospel now the ability to accept
it latter. I wonder if this may actually be motivated by a scheme to get
more money by charging people directly to access the records. What exactly this
policy means however is not 100% clear to me.

Dennis

May 7, 2008 8:14 a.m.

The LDS church doesnt release baptism or temple records to the public, what is
the difference?

Catholic Convert from LDS

May 7, 2008 7:55 a.m.

I happen to be a convert to the Catholic faith, and I know that there are many
others who have converted to Catholism in this happy valley of ours. We
appreciate our Mormon roots but have a hard time with "Pride" that we find in
the above comments.

Using the above logic, if numbers are the only
thing that prove truth, well we should throw time into the mix. The Catholic
Church is 2000 years old. It has had its high and low points, but its still
here. It isn't going away.

So you may have Catholic converts today,
but lets not forget the road runs both ways. With time your Church will have it
ups and downs. I think in the Media your church is being unfairly slaugtered by
the media. It bothers me to see this.

So, lets grow up and see what
the real issue is here:1. Catholics feel their baptism is valid. 2.
Mormons feel their baptism is valid.3. Mormons believe that once an
individual has died that they can correct an invalid baptism4. Catholics
find this offensive.

God Bless

Another thing is....

May 7, 2008 6:41 a.m.

I really miss John Paul II for his peace maker quality. I was sad when he died
and I felt a yuck feeling when Benedict was elected....now I know why. The thing
is that someday this one will leave us as John Paul did. So let's show respect
for their will as much as we feel bad about it so that their is a chance they'll
understand what has been said over and over here.

If right won't matter, if wrong

May 7, 2008 1:21 a.m.

John Lambert, "This is extremely stupid on the part of the Vatican. If the LDS
Church is wrong than their ordinances have no validity, and if their ordinances
have validity than the Vatican is standing in the way of the progress of the
work of God. There is no logically consistent view that includes halting the
Family History work of the LDS Church."

I'm LDS and have a strong
testimony of family history and temple work but your comments are the dumbest I
have ever had the privelige to read. If the Church is wrong which it isn't then
it does make sense that the Catholic Church wouldn't want to offend God and
those who are being baptized for the dead. It seems to me that you place
emphasis on the validity of the ordinances but that isn't how Catholics see it.

They see as an insult to their faith, Catholics and to God. If the
Church is right then it won't matter if Catholics prevent the Church from
baptizing Catholics for the dead since they would understand that our doctrine
allows us to do so in the millenium so it would be logical to have us wait.

LDS convert

May 7, 2008 1:19 a.m.

what Benedict should have done was remove all those Catholic Bishops that
allowed the pedophilia, who transferred them parish to parish. Rome is running
scared due to many catholic priests and nuns being converted to LDS and our
numbers rising. Do not tell me I am ignorant , for I am an ex monk of the
catholic church. Feel nothing but love for catholics brothers and sisters, but
Rome is determined now to squash LDS growth. The Lord will open the door that is
temporarily closed...onward Brethren.

To Kevin

May 6, 2008 11:45 p.m.

What is a knee biter. Is that some sort of insect in Utah? Please explain.

John Lambert

May 6, 2008 11:43 p.m.

If this means that the Vatican is saying to all dioceses to stop letting the
LDS microfilm records this is the worst thing that has occured for Family
History Research this century. Of course Belgium putting the LDS Church
on the list of "dangerous sects" did cause Brussels to cancel a contract to
allow the church to microfilm the records. This is extremely stupid on
the part of the Vatican. If the LDS Church is wrong than their ordinances have
no validity, and if their ordinances have validity than the Vatican is standing
in the way of the progress of the work of God. There is no logically consistent
view that includes halting the Family History work of the LDS Church.

By the way...

May 6, 2008 11:43 p.m.

Non-LDS don't have access to the temple ordinance dates in the International
Genealogical Index (IGI), unless they're lying and saying they're LDS and
forging a username and password (tsk, tsk, tsk). All the claims about the
number of times Anne Frank, Pope John Paul II or Mother Theresa have been
baptized, should be taken with a MAJOR grain of salt. If you can see the names
in the IGI, yes, temple work has been done, but no nonmember would know how many
times without lying and sneaking around - hardly an "objective" point of
view.

Catholics aren't the only ones joining the LDS Church - Jews
are too. Some deceased Jews receive ordinances legitimately from a descendant
who's joined the LDS Church. We're all related so it's silly to think that no
Mormon can claim Jewish ancestry.

Ultimately, the whole thing is a
control issue, rather like fighting over Grandma's will or who gets to dump her
ashes from the helicopter.

RE: New England Mormon...

May 6, 2008 11:36 p.m.

AKA::: Hey, wait a second

An "incredible monority" of mormons have
these views. Well my friend you are incredible insulated from the central office
if you think the LDS church is about "...respect for other religions and loving
one another."

5 Million in the US; well I would argue with that as
well ...

To: Hey, waid a second

May 6, 2008 11:21 p.m.

Yes, but aren't the attitudes of LDSmom and Kevin et.al. fascinating?

Hey, wait a second

May 6, 2008 11:03 p.m.

Since when do the views put forth by an incredible minority of the the LDS
Church suddenly represent all of us? There are over 5 million members in the US
alone. If every single post on here was from a different LDS person, it would
represent just slightly more than .0001% of US members, and .00005% of worldwide
members. If you're using this, or Utah for that matter (representing about 10%
of the worldwide Church) as your basis for what "all Mormons are like" your view
is going to be awfully skewed.

I for one am from New England, I'm
Mormon, and I don't like the attitudes I've seen in Utah because they don't
represent the Church that I joined in New England. They represent the elitist
attitude that has become prevalent among some people in Utah. You see this same
attitude among Southern Baptists in the southeast.

The members don't
represent the religion if they don't live its doctrines, like respect for other
religions and loving one another.

Kevin

May 6, 2008 10:29 p.m.

Knee biters are plentiful here. The caravan moves on and will dot the earth with
temples and gods true church will continue his ordinances. No big thing here as
the catholics are just bitter we are authorized and well them; not so much.

To: Jeff

May 6, 2008 10:10 p.m.

You say: "In my humble opinion, a lot of people, including the Pope, need to get
back to basics and rediscover what it takes to be a true follower of Christ.
Lead us not into temptation...to judge one another."----------------But is it not being judgmental to not let (in this case) Catholic baptism
stand w/out additional and presumably *correct* LDS baptism? ... also, am I
hearing it correctly that the deceased can authentically *choose* LDS baptism?

Jeff

May 6, 2008 9:59 p.m.

I am a Genealogist, and I am not Mormon (but have Mormon Ancestors). I have
read many responses that echo the sentiments of Julie who stated that if
Catholics do not believe LDS Baptisms have any affect, then why stand in the
way? This is purely an issue of intollerance. I suppose you could make the
same argument about Gay Marriage, or any other issue you may disagree with
especially if you feel it doesn't apply to you. What do you lose by it, and if
you don't believe it is valid, then why choose to be intollerant of it,
especially if it may mean something positive to someone else? In my humble
opinion, a lot of people, including the Pope, need to get back to basics and
rediscover what it takes to be a true follower of Christ. Lead us not into
temptation...to judge one another.

LDSmom

May 6, 2008 9:51 p.m.

People should do some research before they comment on The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-Day Saints ----(YES that is the name and please use it properly). You
all sound uneducated and obviously dont have a clue on your comments. I am sick
with the arguments on this post!

Achim Erlacher

May 6, 2008 9:50 p.m.

My Ancestors paid and contributed towards the wealth, building up and
maintenance of the Roman Catholic Church for centuries. I am sure that this was
in part their choice but often the consequence of a lack of choices. As taxpayer
in Austria, my taxes still benefit the Roman Catholic Church (e.g. R.C. religous
education at schools is at least in part funded by the State, the upkeep and
renovation of Chapels is in part goverment supported etc.) My ancestor and their
descentants should be able to choose whether they want to be baptised. Strangely
the Roman Catholic Church was not only happy to take my ancestors contributions
who didnt have a choice but also my tax money to keep and maintain records. On
the other hand to be unwilling to share that information with people who have a
personal interest in their ancestors being able to choose, is highly
inappropriate.

banderson

May 6, 2008 9:48 p.m.

For seventy years the LDS Church has offered other churches and other record
holders FREE labor to microfilm their records, FREE permanent safe storage of
the microfilms in Utah,a FREE copy of the microfilm for the record holder as
well as the original records staying with the record holder. I understand it has
been rather common that when a person goes to the trouble to go to an Catholic
or other church in the US or Europe, which has old records in the dusty
basement; they will be referred back to one of the LDS Family History Centers
for easier access to the records.

If you're traveling to an old
church to check out its' records it's wise to check if the records are on LDS
microfilm already, when the old church is open and how much they charge to look
through their sometimes fragile books.Some people think it is more
efficient to borrow, for $5.50, a microfilm from the Family History Library in
Utah than to travel to France, for instance, to look at parish records -- but
not as fun. A catalog of the microfilmed records the Church has is available
FREE on the LDS FamilySearch website.

jake

May 6, 2008 9:45 p.m.

It's reallt a shame. Just when I thought the two churches were gaining respect
and understanding for one another, this happens. I am more interested in
preserving records that are being lost @ an alarming rate due to floods, fires,
natural disasters, etc than I am about being petty. I am going to follow what
Pres. Monson has asked us to do, show an increased amount of love for others not
of our faith. I'll let God take care of the rest.

Dear Thomas

May 6, 2008 9:41 p.m.

Thanks for your thoughtful response re specificity. I think that it is fruitless
to expect others to act/react in a certain way. The best judge of how one is
occurring in the world is to measure the response and not look inward at one's
expectation. No?

To: Cougar Royal

May 6, 2008 9:39 p.m.

Just trying to understand the "anti" phenomenon that I always hear around this
LDS community. My read is that any questioning or critical thinking (not simply
being critical but attempting do discern) regardless of sincerity or
respectfulness is: "Anti".

I've also heard it said in this community
that one should think how an "elder" (not sure if that's the term) would respond
and respond in kind. This sounds similar to my initial comment in terms of not
questioning the elders.

is my assessment correct?

Sam

May 6, 2008 9:18 p.m.

To those whom reflect on agency to justify baptism for the dead it is just
wrong. Agency is a mormon theology and not a Christian theology. If one does not
believe in mormonism but is Christian then one does not believe in agency thus
your baptism for the dead is morally bankrupt by Christian standards and
ultimately untrue. You can only have it one way and I am sorry you have chosen
the wrong way.

Banderson

May 6, 2008 9:10 p.m.

Dear Genealogy: I am a volunteer worker at one of the 4,500 Mormon Family
History Centers in the world that the Church staffs with UNPAID volunteers to
help members of the Church and the general public access records of their
ancestors. Admission is always FREE. Tonight I was excited with a lady as she
found on a microfilm the marriage record of her greatgreat grandparents on a
parish record in Cornwall,England in 1865. True, she had spent $5 to borrow the
film. But,she was thrilled. She had found the married couple's names from 3
death certificates of their children for which she had paid the Cornwall
government 45 dollars.

You might be interested in volunteering in a
Family History Center yourself. It's fun to help people find their ancestors.

You might also be interested in volunteering to help for NO PAY with an
LDS Church organized effort to digitize and index all the millions of microfilms
the Church has collected over the last 70 years so they can be provided for FREE
to anyone in the world on the Internet. The project was opened to the public
last August and has about 150,000 volunteers. Everyone please volunteer at
familysearchindexing.org.

Agency

May 6, 2008 8:49 p.m.

I think it's important to point out that the LDS church teaches that those
people who pass on and then have their work done by proxy can choose whether or
not they want to accept it. No one is "forced" and no one is "claimed". It is
done out of love and concern for those people. I think this changes the mindset
and the motivation behind temple work.

Cougar Royal

May 6, 2008 8:40 p.m.

Wow, over 600 comments on this blog! I dont think I have seen so many comment on
a story.. I obviously dont have time to read all the hatred by the anti-mormons
on this story but I am confident and assured they have out done themselves with
these 600 + comments. You gotta love the antis, they sure are a persistent
little bunch.

No Longer Interested

May 6, 2008 8:40 p.m.

To Craigr | 3:29 p.m.,

You may believe whatever you want. Your
attitude is exactly what is making me sick to my stomach and unwilling to meet
with the elders again. I have already called them and cancelled. Believe
whatever the heck you want to. But I can't stand the spirit of people like you.
Bye! Forever!

Bob

May 6, 2008 7:53 p.m.

Most religions are rude. It's the outcome of dogma.

ME ME ME

May 6, 2008 7:48 p.m.

Yet another comment by an LDS member, "It wouldn't be offensive...." It's not
about you. It's about honoring the wishes of the dead and their dead relatives.
Is this how you practice Christianity, by questing the sincerity of Catholics
with regard to their dead? Wow! Ugly.

Dear Losing Track:

You are changing the subject. No one is questing the free information
provided by the LDS Church. I applaud any group who liberally provides such
information; however, you are changing the subject, trying to lose our
discussion track. This is about honoring the wishes of the dead.

Genealogy

May 6, 2008 7:13 p.m.

Getting records from the catholics is great for the mormons church, especially
since I live away from Utah and pay over $5 to see 1 film for a few weeks and
over 15 per film to keep it permanently. It's a great moneymaker on the part of
the mormon church. Perhaps if they offered the catholics a percentage of the
cut, there would not be the problem. Instead the mormons claim the catholics
don't have the REAL priesthood so all baptism must be redone. That is just plain
rude.

Thomas

May 6, 2008 6:54 p.m.

"To: Thomas", apples and oranges are both still fruit.

I guess the
issue is this: At what level of specificity should we be offended by a person's
belief that his religion is preferable to ours?

Traditional
Christian belief is that a person who believes and is baptized will be saved,
while a person who believes not will be damned. All modern, ecumenical attempts
to soften this doctrine aside, most believing Christians, when pressed, would
acknowledge that it's better to be Christian than not. The level of specificity
is Christians versus non-Christians. Is this offensive? Ann Coulter sure
caught some flak for acknowledging this.

The Catholic Church, by
praying specifically for the conversion of the Jews, ratchets the specificity
level up a notch, and singles out one particular group for attention.
Offensive? Some Jews think so.

Mormons take this just one step
further and single out particular (deceased) *individuals,* declaring, by
baptizing them by proxy, that it would be better if each specific person were
Mormon than not.

Maybe there's a bright line between offensive and
inoffensive here, or maybe not. I think we ought to be slow to take offense at
others' sincerely-held religious beliefs.

To: Thomas

May 6, 2008 5:01 p.m.

praying for groups of people to see the light is apples and oranges to actually
attempting to co-opt someone personally and I can still see your point. My
parents were Catholic, I am not but if an attempt is made to specifically co-opt
them, I take it personally and I can easily see how others do the same and find
it astounding that you don't.

If someone says that Americans are X or
that Americans should be X, I'm not bothered. If someone tells me that I should
be X to my face or that my parents should be X, specially on a very deeply
personal level, then it's an issue.

I will venture to say that as
long as you don't see that, issues will continue ...

Thomas

May 6, 2008 4:36 p.m.

Anon, while the Catholics surely have the right to do whatever they want with
their own records, why go out of their way and change the policy now? Why stick
a big papal thumb in the Mormons' eye?

If the Mormons are wrong
about the efficacy of baptism for the dead, then there's no harm done. The dead
are either dead, and don't know anything about it, or they're in heaven or
purgatory or wherever and they can just look down and laugh at the LDS for
wasting their time.

On the other hand, if the Mormons are right,
then providing the souls of the dead access to saving ordinances -- which they
can accept or reject of their own free will, in the light of superior eternal
understanding -- then how is this not a good thing?

The present
Pope has re-authorized the use of a Mass liturgy that prays for the conversion
of the Jews. Some Jews find this offensive. How is this not similar to what
the Catholics object to the LDS doing -- involving references in religious
rituals to the names of people who are happy in their own traditions?

Beam, meet eye.

Anonymous

May 6, 2008 4:05 p.m.

Their records, they can do what they choose with them. End of story. No
bitternes or hate needed nor warranted.

To: to Re: To: Alex

May 6, 2008 3:38 p.m.

"You must be Helen Radkey who constantly complains about this topic with her
internet Reverend status... "----------------------

Now this is
getting stranger and stranger by the minute. My name is Robert Guevara and I
live in California ...

I am here because I take great interest in
people's devotion to religion since it is a central player in how the world
unfolds.

To: I don't get this

May 6, 2008 3:35 p.m.

I think that I am particularly equipped to have this conversation since I am NOT
beholden to any religious system of beliefs yet am NOT an aitheist.
Unfortunately the word limit does not permit. In a nutshell, different systems
of beliefs in this arena each claim to know the: "THE TRUTH" therefore one does
not see harm in "saving" others from within anyone system. My parents were VERY
secure in their Catholic faith and it served them brilliantly till their last
breath. As much as you would like to think that yours in the correct faith, in
their view it is not. Common curtesy and respect for the deeply personal as held
by others should be self-explanatory. To me, it is expressly counter to my
Parents deeply held account of: "THE TRUTH" that I fiercely oppose the albeit
symbolic attempt at religious cooptation since I expressly hold their wishes to
be considered Catholic both in life and in the here-after.

Craigr

May 6, 2008 3:29 p.m.

To "No Longer Interested",

My thoughts: I don't believe you are an
investigator. I believe you are an antagonist to the LDS church, taking
advantage of the opportunity to rebuff them once more.

My advise:
Come on inside the Conference Hall at the next General Conference and see what
all the fuss is about.

Question

May 6, 2008 3:23 p.m.

Why do so many people use the word Christian when referring to universal morals?
Isn't the high standard of respecting the wishes of the dead and the relatives
of their dead a universal moral standard?

This issue really
shouldn't be about religion; it should be about universal morals we all share as
human beings. Everyone should know that it's a high moral good to respect the
wishes of the dead and their relatives. LDS members shouldn't make it about
themselves, as when so many often say, "if someone were to do have a ritual in
my name I wouldn't care." It's not about you. It's about honoring the dead and
their relatives by honoring their wishes.

Craigr

May 6, 2008 3:18 p.m.

Latter Day Saints sing a hymn verse, "For this eternal truth is given, God will
force no man to heaven."The God I believe in, is a God of love. He won't
force His children to accept any proxy act done on their behalf. They will have
their agency to choose. And yes, baptism for the dead is mentioned in the
Bible, 1 Corinthians 15:29.

Bob

May 6, 2008 3:15 p.m.

We need to trust our moral instincts and realize that the best course of action
is to honor relatives of the dead by respecting their decision in the life not
the supposed decision of a dead person.

We meet a higher standard
of morality when he honor the people living in this world as opposed to honoring
your own religious beliefs. Honor all people their wishes concerning their
body and names. I am not a member of any religion, but I believe that we ought
both non-believers and believers their wishes concerning their deaths.

I am relieved with the comments made by the religious regarding their
believing that we should honor the wishes of those who are Catholic. I've read
so many condescending, arrogant and ugly comments by so many LDS members that I
began losing hope that there are few, deeply caring LDS people out there.

to Re: To: Alex

May 6, 2008 2:45 p.m.

your concern has been addressed 1000 times. Most recently by D. Todd
Christofferson before he was called to the 12. Maybe you need to get up to speed
on what is going on before you argue a point that has already been addressed.

Actually, there are no church rules that state that a person must prove
that the names they are submitting are related. Although, it stands to reason
that if someone is going genealogy that they are doing it on their family line.
There is no 95 year old rule either... I've submitted many names that were less
than 95 years deceased and NO ONE has ever asked me my relationship. We are
related but there are not these silly rules you speak of....

And a
quick review of the article it was posted on Feb 22 of this year with Paredes
making his comments on the 16th of Feb. Significance meaning what?

You must be Helen Radkey who constantly complains about this topic with her
internet Reverend status...

No Longer Interested

May 6, 2008 2:33 p.m.

I had been learning about the LDS Church. I was scheduled for another lesson
this week. But Mormon arrogance sickens me. I want nothing to do with such a
Church that is obviously NOT Christian in any way, shape, or form.

Re: "To thanks alot"

May 6, 2008 2:32 p.m.

Are you seriously commenting that I'm looking for "an easy way out"? What gall
to make such an assumption. And, yes, my Catholic friends were following this
story and reading the comments then called me about it wondering what I thought.
You again assume a lot thinking they do not know about the LDS doctrine of
baptism for the dead, and naively assume more that their understanding of it
would enhance their opinion of the church.

"Go for it!" Go for what?
Defending a religion that at least in this forum seems to be more and more
defined by harsh repudiations, arrogant egos, and name-calling of the least of
these? Perhaps it is only in such forums that such disgraceful communication is
carried on. Sadly, it is available for all the world to see.

Alex

May 6, 2008 2:25 p.m.

"Are you implying that if I object to my deceased Parents (Catholic Faith) being
(possibly) posthumously baptized into some sort of LDS framework of beliefs
because I find the act dissrespectful at the very least ... are you saying that
I don't have a leg to stand on? ... just to be clear sir. "

Short
answer: yes, but probably not in your lifetime.

Ultimately, yes, your
father will have opportunity to be baptized into an LDS framework of beliefs, on
conditions that your father does so of his own free will and choice in the world
of the Spirits of the Dead. Ultimately, we believe that all will have
opportunity to receive those ordinances vicariously (one person standing in the
place of another).

That said, it probably wouldn't be done in your
lifetime unless one of your father's posterity as a member of the LDS Church
does that work for him. I have never done work in the temple for someone who
wasn't a family name who wasn't already dead for over 100 years. That is my
experience. (I am sure there are infrequent exceptions.)

I just don't get this

May 6, 2008 2:19 p.m.

To whoever wrote to Alex, Your parents being baptized doesn't change
anything if they don't want it to. Thats the fact, no one has to change faiths
just because we perform a baptism in the temple. If they don't accept than
everything is just same as when they were here. The ordinance isn't forcing
anything on anyone. I do have a serious question for any Catholic, not trying to
argue just understand. When you baptize a child I realize the intent of it is to
make sure they have it done should they pass early in life, but why do the
baptism when the child has no choice?

Mick is right

May 6, 2008 2:10 p.m.

No one should take offense here. Trust in God and move on. He is fair and will
give everyone the same chance to do the same things they need to do to be saved.
That is what helped convert me to the LDS Church. Respect this decision by the
Catholics.

The other thing by which I'm disappointed is that of these
600-plus comments, not one made by a Latter-day Saint contains an invitation to
ask God what He says on this matter. (I helped contribute to this bushel-light
covering, I'll admit).

RE: To: Alex | 1:19 p.m

May 6, 2008 1:57 p.m.

Here's your answer:

From: Letters jtnews.net Note the
date....March 1, 2008

>>[Mark] Paredes stated that Church
rules make it clear that a person who adds a name to the baptism rolls must be
able to prove that they are related...True. But it is also true that this rule,
along with many other rules, are ignored by individual Mormons... For example,
there is a rule that you cannot posthumously baptize any person who was born
within the past 95 years without permission of the closest relative. Yet Anne
Frank was baptized six times. There is a rule that you should baptize only
relatives, not famous people, yet Simon Wiesenthal was recently cleared for
baptism....Paredes states that a Mormon is permitted to perform ordinances on
any relative...True. But the 1995 agreement with the Jewish organization
specifically limits it to direct ancestors. The Church has not enforced this
rule. No one has a right to involve other peoples families in their religion. It
is time that the Mormon Church did the honorable thing and met its commitment to
the Jewish people to cease this offensive act of posthumous baptism as outlined
in the agreement they signed in 1995.

Mohan

May 6, 2008 1:50 p.m.

None of us have the superiority we think we have. We are all off one flesh. We
are all in need. We are all dependent on God. Let us treat each and every one
as a son or daughter of God, as a beloved brother or sister. Let disrespect be
far from us.

I am sure the Catholic Church will soon realize the
effect of their pronouncement and when they better understand what they are
doing in the great scheme of things, they will again allow Mormon volunteers in
assit them by photographing all their vital records. The service rendered by the
LDS in this regard is a God send. May we all realize the connections we have
with each other.

To: Mick

May 6, 2008 1:40 p.m.

"The sad part is when we as Mormons become offended, bitter, and make derogatory
comments towards the Pope, or any other leader for that matter. We only rise
above the level of others when our actions actually show that we live what we
speak. Until that time, we are no better than those we decry."-----------

I find your comments facinating (i'm the author of: "To
Alex") I realize that you are devout (LDS version of devout), but please
carefully reread your comments. It sounds like a barely cloaked jab at those of
another faith. That is: if you live the LDS faith, then you ARE better then
those that don't. If after closely considering this possible interpretation, do
you see how your words seem no better than those of whom you counsel, at least
to an outsider such as myself?

Mick

May 6, 2008 1:28 p.m.

No one should take offense here. Just because someone doesn't agree with our
faith, or doesn't desire to release records, should not anger us. We just have
to remember the perspective they are coming from. No offense, just personal
misunderstanding, or purposeful denial.

The sad part is when we as
Mormons become offended, bitter, and make derogatory comments towards the Pope,
or any other leader for that matter. We only rise above the level of others when
our actions actually show that we live what we speak. Until that time, we are
no better than those we decry.

To: Alex

May 6, 2008 1:19 p.m.

"Fortunately, a good portion of the records have already been documented."

Are you implying that if I object to my deceased Parents (Catholic
Faith) being (possibly) posthumously baptized into some sort of LDS framework of
beliefs because I find the act dissrespectful at the very least ... are you
saying that I don't have a leg to stand on? ... just to be clear sir.

Alex

May 6, 2008 1:11 p.m.

Melissa:

"I guess it's the "grave reservations" part that has
everyone up in arms... I can't figure out why people outside of any church would
think they should just be handed information about a church's members..."

I can. The Catholic Church handed it out themselves.

"...sounds like privacy violations to me. I mean when you think about it, with
all the identity theft going on these days? "

Except there is neither
theft nor any privacy violation here. How could there be if the Catholic Church
allowed access from the beginning? At any rate, all of the records are of dead
people, many of whom have been so for hundreds of years. None of them are
living. These records have been available to the public if they want to go in
and look at them. Now with this edict, they are now available to the public,
minus the LDS Church. Fortunately, a good portion of the records have already
been documented.

Melissa

May 6, 2008 12:24 p.m.

I guess it's the "grave reservations" part that has everyone up in arms... I
can't figure out why people outside of any church would think they should just
be handed information about a church's members... sounds like privacy violations
to me. I mean when you think about it, with all the identity theft going on
these days?

To thanks alot

May 6, 2008 11:58 a.m.

Are you serious? You're stating all your Catholic friends are on this board and
now are questioning your motives as a friend?

Why don't you look at
it a little differently than the sad eyes you are currently using....

Why not look at this as a chance to enhance your friendship and teach them
about the gospel principle of baptisms for the dead? I think I'd turn this into
a chance to enhance my dialogue with them.

Take this chance to deepen
your testimony instead of looking for some easy way out of whatever issues you
have going on....

It's not a show stopper but a friendship
enhancer....Go for it!

Ethicist

May 6, 2008 11:52 a.m.

"They [Catholics] allow us access to these old records, and we
[LDS] provide them and the public with these records of the dead
(microfilm and online)."

A Faustian bargain, indeed!

The
Pope and the Catholic Church are simply doing what they are obliged to do by
their religious beliefs. Ever notice that the Pope carries a shepherd's crook?
That's because as the shepherd of the Roman Catholic Church, his duty is to care
for his flock. If he allowed the members of his flock to be unwillingly
submitted to acts considered heretical by the RC Church (i.e., temple
ordinances) he would be derelict in his duty to care for his flock. Thus, by
the belief system of the Catholic Church, he is obliged to try to put a stop to
the posthumous baptism heresy applied to his members.

He is doing
what he considers to be theologically, morally, and spiritually correct. Can't
fault someone for living up to his principles.

Thomas

May 6, 2008 11:12 a.m.

Nobody's asking the Catholic Church to "cooperate" with the Mormon practice of
baptism for the dead. Everybody knows that the Catholic Church disagrees with
the practice. All that Mormons are asking is to have the same access to
Catholic records as anyone else.

It is gallingly hypocritical for the
Catholic Church to argue that giving Mormons equal access to parish records --
without endorsing what Mormons do with them -- constitutes "cooperation" with an
allegedly heretical practice, when the Church employs professors at Catholic
universities who support abortion, or otherwise teach in direct opposition to
the Magisterium of the Church.

The Church thus gets to buy doctrinal
rigor on the cheap, taking shots at an unpopular sect, while declining to cease
its much more direct endorsement of heterodox ideologies by allowing them to be
taught at its own universities.

Clearly, the Church is far more
concerned with making friends with modern secular culture than with the Mormons,
with whom -- doctrinal differences aside -- they share a much more consistent
basic worldview.

Cheap and shabby, I still say, and unworthy of the
Church's great traditions.

Alex

May 6, 2008 11:05 a.m.

Pretend:

"I would not expect the Church to cooperate with pagans
either, so why with LDS church henotheists? "

Simple: because the
Catholic Church has cooperated with the LDS Church for a long time. Look, this
work for the dead and genealogical work using Catholic records has been going on
for a long time. Over these many years, it is not as if the Catholic Church
didn't know what we were doing. Come on. So many posters here act surprised as
if the Catholic Church had been hoodwinked by the LDS Church. The Catholic
Church knows full well and has known for a long time that we do work for the
dead.

This has been a cooperative effort: you scratch my back, I'll
scratch yours. They allow us access to these old records, and we provide them
and the public with these records of the dead (microfilm and online). We in
turn use them in our temples. It has been a mutually beneficial
relationship.

Naturally, it is the Catholic Church's right to cease
that practice. Remember though, they are doing so after benefiting greatly from
the LDS Church's genealogical work for their benefit.

By the way,
Catholics are my friends.

Supportive

May 6, 2008 11:04 a.m.

This comment board is a very good example of begging the question "why on earth
would anyone wish to live all eternity linked to everyone else?" I'd much prefer
my own wee piece of the universe in a galaxy far, far away.

G

May 6, 2008 11:05 a.m.

"Absolutely and rightfully so. And it is a Mormon problem, not a Catholic
problem. "

Why should Mormons try to appease anyone else?

Thanks a lot

May 6, 2008 11:00 a.m.

Just a word of thanks to my *fellow LDS* who have commented with such anger and
disrespect toward the Catholic Church. You have made my friendships with my
Catholic friends more comfortable today. No. Think again. Today they are
asking me if I truly accept them as they are or if I have an agenda percolating
somewhere to "save them." The more I read the words of self-names active LDS on
these comment boards, the more I reconsider the beneficial effects of the LDS
faith. As of today, I'm sure I will be walking out the door of this religion as
the goodness of the works of the people was the last thing I was clinging to in
order to feel good about belonging.

Don't worry, it'll be fine

May 6, 2008 10:15 a.m.

The Catholics don't want us to see their records, and they'll probably try to
impose some system whereby they'll discover our Mormonness and exclude us from
using their records to further our genealogical research.

If the
work is meant to be done, it will be done. There will be a way around this and
any other roadblock that may come along.

The commandment to perform
these ordinances for our family members came along just a few years after the
Church was restored. The early Church members didn't have cars, computers,
telephones, Internet, pedigree charts or family group sheets, but they went
ahead and did what they were asked. With all the developments that have come
about since then, I doubt the Roman Catholic Church's latest edict will be able
to put a dent in our temple work.

Let's not spend time worrying or
bickering. Let's just get busy instead. We still have a lot to do!

I'm LDS

May 6, 2008 10:13 a.m.

When my family was attempting to sell our home, my mother's Catholic Co-Worker
asked is she might bury a statue of a Catholic Saint in our front yard and
perform a prayer. Though I had reservations on the matter, my insightful mother
agreed to let her. Their friendship has never been stronger and our beliefs were
not compromised by her actions. Also, our house did sell.

I guess my
point is this: The Catholic Church has taken an action on a universal level.
Let's take our own action at a personal level and show love and understanding to
our Catholic brothers and sisters.

Pretend

May 6, 2008 9:31 a.m.

I would not expect the Church to cooperate with pagans either, so why with LDS
church henotheists?

Think about it

May 6, 2008 9:29 a.m.

I wonder what bring the practice of baptisms of the dead to general knowledge
will do for Romney's electability in 2012. Hard to know if that or his having
acknowledged having polygamous grandparents will hurt him more.

Curious

May 6, 2008 9:29 a.m.

Father James Massa, executive director of the U.S. bishop's Secretariat of
Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs is quoted by CNS as saying the step was
taken to prevent LDS members from using the records.

"The
congregation requests that the conference notifies each diocesan bishop in order
to ensure that such a detrimental practice is not permitted in his territory,
due to the confidentiality of the faithful and as not to cooperate with the
erroneous practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,"

Many people here are stating that LDS true colors are coming out on this
board. The comment above is stating that the LDS Church is erroneous and has a
detrimental practice, is this considered Christian way of doing things? Insult
the others' believes? I could understand if the statement was made as we don't
belive the same as the Mormons and therefore choose not to provide names but the
context and words say something else all together.

Shocking

May 6, 2008 9:29 a.m.

I just checked and MOTHER Teresa (Agnes Bojaxhiu) was baptized into the Mormon
church so was John Paul II (Karol Wojtyła) Egads, no wonder you have
angered both the Jewish people and now the Catholics. It would not surprise me
if this action was the very one that put a stop to communication.

Offensive

May 6, 2008 9:24 a.m.

Thomas said: "The problem with the Catholic reaction is that it's effectively
declaring a major tenet of Mormonism to be inherently offensive."

Absolutely and rightfully so. And it is a Mormon problem, not a Catholic
problem.

Who cares !! !

May 6, 2008 8:50 a.m.

Who cares if the Mormans Baptize non-Mormans into the church after you're dead?
The concept is so off base that it has no Biblical meaning! Let them continue to
pretend they are doing something spiritual. This sort of act they administer is
no different than the Baal worship that took place thousands of years ago in the
Middle East. My security in the living Christ is never compromised by the
insecurities the Morman church practices.

to Catholic Homer

May 6, 2008 7:25 a.m.

How many are active?

Oh, different number?

rudragoo

May 6, 2008 6:48 a.m.

So much about hese people from 200+ years ago wanting to be catholic. Who says
they wanted to be? where was their choise? Just as with the religious terrorists
today it was do as we say or we will torture and kill you. Perhaps they wanted
to worship God instead of statues. Too bad. And they are my records as it is my
family, not the jailers that recorded them.

James

May 6, 2008 5:50 a.m.

The main problem is that Christian religions use the Bible to justify their
actions. Quote this and that passage and that somehow authorizes them to act
the way they do. All religion and all scripture is man-made and thus faulty.We who choose not to get caught up in all the nonsense just sit back and
giggle over your silliness.

Diogenes

May 6, 2008 5:34 a.m.

I don't recall having seen such vitriol spewed forth when the Jews demanded an
end to the posthumous baptism of members of their faith. Of course, it's
politically incorrect to bash Jews, but apparently not Catholics. The fact that
so many Mormons don't recognize that *all* religions deserve respect is telling.
It's incidents like this through which their true colors come shining
through.

As someone pointed out earlier, this has set back the cause
of interfaith dialogue, by about 130 years.

Not a Catholic.Not
a Jew.Not a Mormon.Just a tolerant atheist.

Yockel

May 6, 2008 4:31 a.m.

Exercise a little Christian charity, people. How would you feel if an alien
religious tradition laid claim to your ancestors?Although it will be
soothing to many people to find out that Mormons believe that baptisms for the
dead require the demised's consent to become valid, it is not hard to see that
to non-Mormons temple ordinances are imposing on their heritage.For a
culture that places so much value on our own heritage, it is troubling how
little Utah Mormons appreciate the feelings of non-Mormons. I am sorry to say
but your lack of sensitivity and charity is giving Mormonism a bad name.

to; Thomas

May 6, 2008 4:26 a.m.

A friendly approach to LDS posthumous baptism would be to make clear that the
RCC disagrees, but Mormons are free to act as their consciences dictate.

I dont think the Vatican is saying that Mormons shouldnt be free to act
as their conscience dictates. They are saying that since they theologically
disagree with the Mormon practice, they will not be a party to condoning it.

I dont understand why Mormons are so obtuse regarding this. I have
never met a larger group of people with such a sense of entitlement that they
think rules just dont apply to them. Your LDS leaders are constantly issuing
statements the media condemning the FLDS and their practices. They are offended
if the LDS are confused with the FLDS, and spend an inordinate amount of effort
strutting the differences. The LDS refused to assist the court during FLDS
prayer, and have chosen to oppose any perception that they even remotely condone
the FLDS practices.

This is no different. You can stop acting so
persecuted. Go ahead and perform your misguided baptisms, but dont expect
people of other faiths who believe its heretical to any way assist in your
efforts or indulge your practices.

"Simon Wiesenthal, a survivor of the
Nazi death camps, dedicated his life to documenting the crimes of the Holocaust
and to hunting down the perpetrators still at large."

Mr. Wiesenthal
was born a Jew in 1908. He suffered during the Holocaust because he was a Jew,
and members of his family were murdered because they were Jews. He lived his
whole life as a Jew. And when he died in 2005, he was a Jew. One year later, Mr.
Wiesenthal's name was submitted to LDS, and he was baptized vicariously.

Nobody can honestly claim that Mr. Wiesenthal wasn't aware of the
existence of Jesus or the existence of LDS. Nobody can honestlyy claim that they
thought Mr. Wiesenthal would like to have the opportunity to stop being Jewish
after his death.

To perhaps

May 6, 2008 1:14 a.m.

"If my child converted to Catholic, would I be totall included by the priest in
the ceremony? Not."

Uh, yes you would. You would be able to sit in
the pews with everyone else and witness the beautiful sacrament of your child's
marriage. It's traditional for parents to attend their child's wedding.

Lisa

May 6, 2008 1:03 a.m.

I think what some people fail to understand is that a person could theoretically
be baptized posthumously into any and every religion, but none of those baptisms
will matter if the person (whom Latter-day Saints believe to be living now as a
spirit in the Spirit World) decide to accept it. No rights or agency is being
denied. The temple work performed on behalf of others only benefits them if
they accept it and want it.

With that understanding, I truly would
not care if after I died, someone who loved me and was concerned about my soul,
performed some ceremony for me, even if I didn't believe it would change my
situation, and even if it was into another religion. In the eternal scheme of
things, I believe it wouldn't make a difference to my soul, but should I see
that person in the next life, I would thank them for caring about me.

Kropotkin

May 6, 2008 1:00 a.m.

1. Proxy baptism does not baptise into the LDS Church, it provides a sacrament
that is only provided by the LDS Church through priesthood authority. It has
nothing to do with any other baptism the individual may have had. It also does
NOT make the individual a member of the church.2. Every individual has
been saved by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. LDS Baptism does not
provide salvation, it allows progression in the next life.Obviously, those
outside the church refuse to listen, so there is little point arguing with them.
However, it would help if more members were better informed and didn't make
daft statements that misrepresent the church; it would also help if people
remembered that they can only baptise their own relatives.

Truth & Patience:Continued

May 6, 2008 12:49 a.m.

So if it is right, under God, to love your enemy and to do no harm to others,
the definition of harm comes in to play.

Is it harmful to use a name
for ordinances which I believe will save someone if they accept it and if they
do not it has no effect? Where 'they have to accept it for the work to be valid'
self proves that it does no harm to any individual whether alive or not. The
choice is still with the party in question(the dead) and THEIRS to make. No
other person has a right to decide this for them. We are giving others a chance
to accept the LDS faith. By not giving them that chance(or specifically taking
it away) the Catholic church is only denying the dead THEIR RIGHT to choose what
they will.

Who would disagree with this fair LDS doctrine? (Legal
argument reworded for religious freedom argument)

"we do not believe
that ... has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the
consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion ... never
control conscience ... but never suppress the freedom of the soul." -D&C:134

Thomas

May 6, 2008 12:39 a.m.

The problem with the Catholic reaction is that it's effectively declaring a
major tenet of Mormonism to be inherently offensive. That makes it difficult
for Mormons and Catholics to simply agree in good will to disagree: The Vatican
is not just saying that this sincerely-held Mormon belief is erroneous, but that
it's *bad*.

That way lies holy war. The West has managed to rise
above religious strife largely by separating religious differences from moral
comparisons: We've moved away from declaring people who hold different
religious opinions to be *evil* (although many Mormons seem not to have gotten
the memo when it comes to dealing with former members!); rather, religious
differences are chalked up to our knowing the things of God only in part during
our mortal lives, and though we don't whitewash our honest differences, we don't
get too exercised about them, either.

The Vatican is reversing this
positive trend by this policy. A friendly approach to LDS posthumous baptism
would be to make clear that the RCC disagrees, but Mormons are free to act as
their consciences dictate.

I have always greatly admired the Catholic
Church, but it deeply disappoints me with this unfriendly act.

Hostility

May 5, 2008 11:44 p.m.

Limbo Rock is correct. And yes, even peaceful Christians can express hostility
and outrage when dealing with those who express those same emotions toward us,
as well as dishonor our Christian faith (much in the same way we have been
outraged at radical Muslum extremists in recent years). It may not be right, be
we are human and we do ask the Lord to forgive, and put our trust in Him.

Limbo Rock

May 5, 2008 11:27 p.m.

Once more... | 9:17 a.m. May 5, 2008"One more try...there is NO religous
issue at stake here."

Of course not, for you. But there is for Jews,
members of the Armenian Church, Russian Orthodox, the Evangelisch Church in
Germany, and Catholics, all of whom have expressed outrage at the Mormon
practice of posthumous baptism.

Michael

May 5, 2008 11:23 p.m.

Wow, I'm amazed at how out of control everyone is (especially Hostility.) Shame
on all of us! Perhaps this emotionalism just comes with the terrain of blogging.
Print the forum? A "Godsend"? Those sound like emotionalized, conniving fighting
words. Both faiths have been shamed in this forum, so will it ALL be printed? In
a time when many are turned off religion altogether, who are we pulling for
anyway?

The Catholic Church isn't declaring anything new, I have to
admit. It has just been the policy of this new pope to draw a line of
demarcation between his religion and others. Recently he reiterated the view
that Protestant religions are invalid. It's too bad because John Paul II had
made so much progress to bridge gaps and promote dialogue.

My roots
are in Italy, where I've already seen many Catholic priests refuse to let people
of other faiths see their parish records. Others have been more lax about it.
Obviously, Benedict XVI is trying to guilt them into his way, but I'm sure there
will still be ways around it. Many Catholic clergymen (and Catholics) show
goodwill to other faiths. I've only seen a couple in this forum.

owning names and people

May 5, 2008 11:03 p.m.

I didn't know that any one group had the AUTHORITY to own names and people,whether DEAD or ALIVE.

Free access to history must be the rule.
Free access to names, dates, places, etc. No one group (whether a
religious entity or not) should have the right to be so closed minded.

Unless a person specifically mentioned (sealed by a notary) that they
never wanted their name etc. given out, then records must be left open.

Since when can the catholic church dictate what any other church does?
Freedom of religion (even in Italy) is the rule of law.

Hostility

May 5, 2008 10:57 p.m.

Mary Anne fittingly said, "..there seems to be great hostility between Mormons
and Catholics." What most LDS don't realize is that most Catholics have never
heard of their church, or at best confuse it with the Jehovah's Witnesses or
Scientologists. However, things are about to change. I was told about this
forum by a friend on the East Coast. Right now this forum is being copied and
will surely be distributed to Catholics everywhere. If the LDS wants to be
better-known, it's wish is about to become reality. The Baptists were already
onto you, now it will be the Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, etc. Hostility?
Yes! Bring it on. The LDS dream of joining mainstream Christianity in the US is
now dead and buried and no temple rite will ever bring it back. The LDS posts on
this forum is a Godsend to Catholic apologists everywhere.

just a thought

May 5, 2008 10:55 p.m.

There has been a lot of abusive language in this stream that surprises me. The
Catholic Church has the right to say that they don't wish to be a party to a
practice they believe to be wrong. In fact, since the Catholic Church believes
itself to be the only true church it is appropriate that they take this step.
It is also not surprising that the LDS Church would be disappointed in this move
because they believe that they are the only true church and that only through
these ordinances on behalf of the dead can everyone who has ever lived have a
chance to attain the highest degree of celestial glory. It is, however,
an issue that the church leaders involved should deal with and settle. All of
this wrangling online is merely fostering discord and contention, something
neither church is interested in promoting. Perhaps we should seek to be a little
more constructive and a little less flippant or accusatory. Just a thought.

Jim J in Cedar Rapids

May 5, 2008 10:54 p.m.

I am dismayed at the antagonistic and offensive statements by both sides of
the issue. Obviously, I am not going to change anyone's mind on either side of
the issue. But, really, I have read very few posts that exhibit the love and
charity exemplified by our Savior. Several misconceptions that should be
corrected; 1) Temple work is at the request of decendent family members of the
deceased. Normally, not always, a relative has done the research and submitted
the names to the temple for proxy work. 2) As Latter-day Saints, we do believe
strongly in an afterlife where those who did not receive the Gospel of Jesus
Christ in life, have the opportunity to be taught and accept the ordinances from
the temple on their behalf. It is still their choice to accept or not the
blessings and ordinances of the Gospel. 3) The Church has become more sensitive
to the wishes of other family members and cultures not of our faith. Not always
compliant, but trying to do better. I consider it an honor and sacred
privilege to do this work for my ancesters. It is their agency to accept or
not.

Liars

May 5, 2008 10:49 p.m.

Shelley | 5:23 p.m. May 4, 2008"Not so very many years ago, the Jews were
offended to discover that some Holocaust victims had been given proxy baptisms.
Out of respect for the history and feelings of those of another faith, the LDS
Church no longer allows its members to perform proxy baptisms for Jews unless
the member involved can show family ties to the ancestor being proxied. ... Why
not do the same thing for the Catholics, if they feel offended by the ordinance
of proxy baptism for the dead?"

In fact, it's probably because of the
broken promises made to the Jews by the LDS that the Catholic Church is wary.
Despite a written agreement in 1995, thousands of Jews continue to be baptized
by proxy, and they're still upset about it.

Becasue my Dear Julie

May 5, 2008 10:38 p.m.

If I died as a Catholic, Jew, Hindu, Muslim, etc then that was my faith I chose.
I would roll over in my grave if later on a LDS family member came by and
baptised me as a LDS.

This is against freedom of religion. Logic
says that if the dead person wanted to be LDS they would have converted when
they were alive!

Sad

May 5, 2008 10:37 p.m.

How sad, every time I think there is hope that the LDS people will look at
Catholics as a loving and faithful people in our own right. Something like this
comes to light. We are Catholics because it is right, are faith, are
truth, and our joy. We do not ask you to be something else. Do not ask us to be
something we are not. Only in Utah. What happened to live and let live? What
happen to love they neighbor? It is time to say goodbye to Utah and find a
new home where people worry less about if you are Mormon or not and more about
what kind of person you are.

Naive?

May 5, 2008 10:36 p.m.

ladyblueyes | 2:18 a.m. May 4, 2008"It's not true that we baptize EVERYONE
... it has to be submitted by a family member for that to happen. But it would
be nice to have all the information for geneology."

Ya, right.
That's why Pope John Paul II was baptized by the LDS exactly one year to the day
after he died, 4 times, no less.

Excuse Me?!?

May 5, 2008 10:26 p.m.

"deceased are baptized into the LDS faith so that they may be united in the
afterlife with LDS families, if they so choose."

They are dead so how
do they choose to be LDS? A living family member decides? Isn't that against
freedom of religion? I would be pissed if after I died someone without by
consent or will changed my faith.

to It wouldn't be offensive

May 5, 2008 10:09 p.m.

"If those of other faiths were truly secure in their own faith, they would
dismiss any LDS baptisms for the dead as the erroneous choice of a deluded
people."

Everyone already *knows* it's deluded. It's the arrogance
and insensitivity of it that people are talking about. Anyone can be fooled but
even if they are, they can and should be a decent human being.

jennifer

May 5, 2008 10:08 p.m.

Baptism by Proxy Doctrine | 10:48 a.m. May 4, 2008, wrote:

"Christ
was perfect and yet he was still baptized."

Here is the
explanation.

Ambrose in Luke 3:21: "Our Lord was baptized because He
wished, not to be cleansed, but to cleanse the waters, that, being purified by
the flesh of Christ that knew no sin, they might have the virtue of baptism."

Chrysostom (Hom. iv in Matth.): "that He might bequeath the sanctified
waters to those who were to be baptized afterwards."

Dissed

May 5, 2008 9:57 p.m.

ladyblueyes | 2:18 a.m. May 4, 2008"I cannot believe the Catholic church
is being so stingy and dog-in-the-manger."

Money | 6:59 p.m. May 4,
2008"These posts are silly. The obvious truth is the Catholic chuch wants
money for its records and that's it."

It's not about being stingy.
It's about respecting others beliefs, something you apparently know nothing
about.

One-Upmanship...

May 5, 2008 9:48 p.m.

I see a lot of idioc comments by mormons.I have less respect for the mormon
church from these comments on this post. I once thought that it was possible we
had the same end game put now I just see the mormons for how they truly are with
all these comments,,,,

Patty

May 5, 2008 9:45 p.m.

This may not be an important issue to some. But to someone trying to
raise their non- Mormon children is a small town with a Very large Mormon
population, this is important. Our children face discrimination every day at
school and in their neighborhoods. If you move into Utah into a small town, one
of the first things you are asked is: are you a Mormon? We must take the
time to let are feeling known, we all have rights. And not being baptized a
Mormon after we die is one of them.

Sasha

May 5, 2008 9:42 p.m.

Rob | 4:34 p.m. May 4, 2008, wrote:"It's understandable if the Catholic or
Jewish leaders think the LDS church has secret plans to use all this data they
are collecting on people and families to do something other than what they say
they are doing, which is performing proxy ordinances."

Catholics,
Jews, and others are aware that it's for proxy baptism. They don't think it's
for some other purpose. Their objection is based on knowing that it's for proxy
baptism.

Sojourner Truth

May 5, 2008 9:35 p.m.

Two faced | 2:04 a.m. May 4, 2008"I love these churches who on the one
hand, will do almost anything to attack, embarass and arm twist the LDS Church.
But then, the second there's a fire at one of their churches, or a natural
disaster somewhere, they churches often turn around and beg for the LDS Church's
assistance."

Hmm, I cant recall one instance in the past 50 years
where the Catholic Church has begged for the LDS Churchs assistance. Quit
distorting the truth!

Bob

May 5, 2008 9:35 p.m.

As far as I can tell, most LDS members posting in this thread are on low moral
ground. Such is the nature of religious dogma.

Love Catholic friends

May 5, 2008 9:32 p.m.

I love my catholic friends. My grandfather was catholic and joined the church,
and now we are all subsequently LDS. We are grateful that the Catholic church
has opened up its records in the past to us LDS decendents of these good people.
Nearly all of my employees are non-mormons- 18 out of 20, and half of these are
catholic- great people- and good friends. I treat them well. Not all mormons
are against other churchses. I hope that I am an example of that, and I know
that most of my LDS friends are that way as well..but there are a few imposters
here on this comment board I believe that try to make us look bad. Thanks.

Bob

May 5, 2008 9:29 p.m.

I am not a member of any religion. I believe that we should respect the wishes
of the dead and their relatives. When I see the people choose religious dogma
over the wishes of a Catholic or Jewish family, I remember why I not a member of
any religion.

Irish Catholic

May 5, 2008 9:29 p.m.

I can feel the love... Can't you? What a waste! And we wonder why the world is
in its current state of disrepair. If we had this much debate about local issues
OF IMPORTANCE we would actually SOLVE problems rather than create them so as to
hide from the reality of the world.

Saddened

May 5, 2008 9:29 p.m.

It is sad that the Pope and the Vatican take this position. My family and I are
LDS and we embrace working together with other faiths. Here in Colorado the
Catholic and LDS Churches join with many others in common charitable
undertakings. My two oldest sisters graduated with nursing degrees from the old
Catholic Holy Cross School of Nursing in Salt Lake City and I remember as a
small boy enjoying their graduation ceremonies held in the Cathedral of the
Madeleine. Unfortunately, I lay this edict at the door of Pope Benedict. I
served an LDS mission in the Germany Munich Mission from 1977-1979. The Pope,
who at that time was Cardinal Josef Ratzinger of the Archdiocese of Munich,
personally undertook to shut out LDS missionaries from the city of Freising,
home of the Archdiocese (he made sure no one would rent to them, etc.), and from
the heavily Catholic city of Passau. Just look at his history of antagonizing
Lutherans in Germany, provoking Muslims since becoming Pope, etc. This too will
pass, but in the meantime he is needlessly picking fights with other faiths.
However, we should turn the other cheek and keep the dialogue with Catholics
open.

Roy

May 5, 2008 9:24 p.m.

Julie | 12:48 a.m. May 4, 2008"I'm still trying to figure out why it
bothers people that mormons do baptisms for the dead if non-mormons don't
believe that it has any effect."

Are you serious? I find this and
all other comments like this to be insensitive, ignorant, arrogant, and
disrespectful. How would you like it if some other religion forced their dogma
on you or a member of your family after you were dead?

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 9:19 p.m.

Live Well, Laugh Often, Love MuchFreedom of choice, God gave us that
choice.

Bob

May 5, 2008 9:15 p.m.

Why are people placing a greater importance of claim of an afterlife that no one
can substantiate as true when there is so much to learn about in the here and
now? The moral life begins on earth.

Jo

May 5, 2008 9:11 p.m.

Ooooh! I get so angry when I read how arrogant and offensive so many comments by
Mormons are!

If I had any doubts about whether or not Mormons are
Christian, I am convinced now that they ARE NOT!

Bob

May 5, 2008 9:11 p.m.

Thomas,

While it's true that we see things in part, why focus on
matter beyond life and stake our moral claims on experience? Regardless of
religion, we all share the same moral instincts as the rest of us. Religious
dogma seems to stir in a mix of an inflexibility that disregards the feelings
of others, which is moral failing. I read a lot of LDS members saying, "why be
bothered with using your name in our temple rituals?" I ask then, "why be
bothered with holding on to religious doctrine at the expense of ignoring the
wishes of a dead person's relative?" I'm not a Catholic or Jew, but seems sense
to me that most people don't want their dead relatives name used in anyone's
ritual.

Why not let go of dogma? There are better things in life on
which to focus and apply one's energies.

Patty

May 5, 2008 9:02 p.m.

Catholics do not worship Mary. Lets not lose sight of what we are talking
about. The freedom of choice. My choice is NOT to be baptized a Mormon after Im
died. What is wrong with that?

Bob Krebs

May 5, 2008 8:57 p.m.

It's interesting that people in this string are attacking the Catholic Church
for not supporting a position that She believes in error. Would the LDS Church
support a position that it believes is in error?

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 8:55 p.m.

Unbelievable

patty

May 5, 2008 8:55 p.m.

Thomas: I have lived in Utah a long time. I know how this goes. Non-Mormons are
wrong in your eyes.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 8:52 p.m.

You LDS are hypocrites!

People who believe differently than you are
constantly performing ceremonies and rites that you find offensive. Take Burning
Man, for example. People of other faiths dress in Mormon Temple clothes and
depict their own interpretations of the Temple ordinances. It is very
instructive, but I have NEVER met a Mormon who is not offended by it!

So don't tell me you Mormons would not be offended if other churches did that!
You are liars and hypocrites!

In the tunnel

May 5, 2008 8:51 p.m.

Thomas

You're educated and intelligent, yet you've spent countless
hours looking in to religion for answers. You're the only one posting here who
has any hope. Free yourself from your past.

Patty

May 5, 2008 8:49 p.m.

Thomas: I have lived in Utah a long time. This will be one more why of Mormons
trying to make non-Mormon feel like something is wrong with them. You may feel
its your right to do this. Guess what, its within my rights to say back off.
Believe what you want, but dont try to take away my right to do the same.

mary anne

May 5, 2008 8:45 p.m.

Based on what i have read today in this forum, I think that there is great
hostility between Mormons and Catholics. It also appears that the Catholic
Church has acted within its rights. I do not hear of anyone suing the church to
get at the records.

Mormons also like to think they are now
"Christians," part of the worldwide Christian movement, but the Catholic church
has set that thought aside, hasn't it. Pope drew a line in the sand.

Some have written about how these two Christian bodies have been torn asunder
by the Catholic orders. Au contraire, it was never together. I recall a
childhood where Mormons would always tell the Catholics that the Catholics were
headed straight to hell.

So, relax. The RC has the records, the
world continues to spin, and roses still bloom in the spring. Nothing has
actually changed, but some things are more out in the open.

I've got an idea

May 5, 2008 8:44 p.m.

Why not just baptize everyone into every conceivable religion so that when
they're dead they're covered since none of the others count and, apparently, the
wishes of the individual don't either?

Thomas

May 5, 2008 8:43 p.m.

Amber -- Read the referenced post a second time, this time with your irony
detector turned on.

Amber

May 5, 2008 8:32 p.m.

"Like the Jews, apparently he must believe in the LDS doctrine of baptism for
the dead and sealings of families."

Jews do NOT belive in the
doctrine of baptism for the dead and sealings of families. Find out the facts
before you post.

Thomas

May 5, 2008 8:31 p.m.

Patty -- The Mormon position is that you may have a clearer understanding of
what you really want once God shows it to you when you're dead.

Like
or not, that strikes me as pretty rational. As Paul said, on the earth we see
and know things only in part. Mormons who believe their religion is correct
naturally believe that its correctness will be made clear in the eternities,
once people's knowledge is more complete.

And they must be correct --
I've never heard a dead person complain about being subjected to posthumous
Mormon baptism. ;)

Patty

May 5, 2008 8:16 p.m.

This has everything to do with respect. If I wanted to be baptized a Mormon I
would do so while Im alive. What makes anyone feel they are better or know
better than I do when it comes to my wishes?

Thomas

May 5, 2008 8:13 p.m.

Aimee -- What translation are you using? Neither the KJV nor the NIV -- the
only translations I'm very familiar with -- come anywhere close to "forbidding"
the practice. To the contrary, the text (1 Corinthians 15:29) is hard to
interpret in any other way than indicating that Corinthian Christians were
engaged in baptism for the dead, and that Paul was not criticizing them.

I'd be happy to hear your explanation of how Paul actually forbids the
practice.

Halcyon

May 5, 2008 8:03 p.m.

Why do the Mormons think they have a right to have copies of all the records in
the world. They aren't *your* records. Get over it!

Aimee

May 5, 2008 7:55 p.m.

Julie,

Maybe it's because it's forbidden in the New Testament by
St. Paul to baptize for the dead. If you read the Holy Bible more than the Book
of Mormon you would find that out.

Dead aren't really dead

May 5, 2008 7:45 p.m.

When people die, they no longer have a physical body! Their spirits existed
before they came to earth to receive a body and their spirits continue to exist
even after they lose their body. Death has no true hold on anyone anymore
because Christ died and was resurrected. Resurrection means he got his body and
his spirit back. No one got their bodies back until he got His back. Now,
because of Jesus Christ, everyone gets their bodies back. But, Not everyone
gets to return to the presence of God! Most people don't get it, but the
CoJCoLDS knows that the dead aren't dead. In fact, many dead persons appear to
the living asking them to do their work for them. Unless you have had this
experience, you don't understand the truthfulness of it. In fact, why
does non-members act as though their dead are dead? They are NOT! And if they
come to a living person, then they have their permission don't they? These dead
come to faithful and inspire them where to find their information. It doesn't
matter where it is, they know where their information is. And they lead living
persons to it, won't hinder God's work.

Chris Plummer

May 5, 2008 7:39 p.m.

A lot of Mormons posting are saying that no-one should care about baptisms for
the dead that they are doing to devout persons of other religions.Sounds
to me like two VERY touchy subject. Religion and dead relatives. Are you
really surprised that people are getting offended. Those two subjects can get
two people fist fighting and/or killing in a matter of seconds if the correct
buttons are pushed. Treat other peoples religions and dead relatives with
respect, something this comments sections hasn't done.

aj arizona

May 5, 2008 7:37 p.m.

If the Pope wants to take his ball and go home, then so be it. The World is
poorer for it.

As for the Mormons, their records are open for the
World to share, free of charge, whether you subscribe to their beliefs or
not.

aj arizona

May 5, 2008 7:37 p.m.

Rome looks pretty silly on this one and by expressing the reason behind their
actions, it has proven they are telling another faith what they can and cannot
believe.

For fifteen hundred years the Church was the State. There
was no seperation. Records which were lost in fires, or floods, fortunately,
because of the Mormon's efforts, were preserved before they were lost.

My wifes entire Family tree on her fathers side is Italian, we have gone back
6 generations, a seven year effort. Thanks to these precious records. Our
Catholic cousins, back East, have needed to show their lineage in order to
qualify for their jobs in Italy. When they needed the information, we had it for
them.

The value of these records are not just for Mormons. The LDS
Church indexed the entire Ellis Island records, for the World to cherish, there
is a plaque in the main hall, thanking the Church for their efforts. The African
American bank records were indexed for the world to enjoy, without these, most
African Americans would be at a dead stop on their family histories.

These records belong to the FAMILY OF MAN, of which we all belong.

aj arizona

May 5, 2008 7:34 p.m.

At this hospital, Holy Cross, SLC, Utah, and at that time, early 1950's, these
Nuns had no authority, they needed a Priest. That was their declared policy.

And Catholic positions have never changed in 5 years?

The
larger point is, Religions disagree every day on points of doctrine. That
doesn't mean you throw down the gauntlet every time you may disagree.

The Catholic Church has picked a fight with an ally, where one was not
necessary.

They are trying to dictate to another Church what they can
and cannot believe. A doctrine which is biblical, by the way. 1 Cor. 15:29 &
John 3:5.

If the Lord says you cannot enter his Kingdom, without
baptism, where is your provision for those who never were?

Mormons
don't believe in the Cross or the Crucifix as jewelery. They don't use rosary
beads to keep count of prayers. They don't believe the Eucharest turns wine and
a wafer into Christ's blood and flesh, Literally.

Has the Mormon
Church ever given an Edict, prohibiting the selling of Gold and Silver and beads
and grapes and wheat, which can be used for Catholic practices which the Mormons
don't agree with?

"For The Love... | 4:38 p.m. May 5, 2008For
the love, folks, show a little respect and humility in what you post for the
world to read. I am active LDS, but Mormons do not have the market cornered on
goodness or spirituality, nor do we have a free pass to ignore the often
understandable concerns of those not of our faith.

Your church
leaders would never encourage you to defend your faith in the manner that many,
if not most, of the posters here are attempting. It does much more harm than
good.

Explain, yes. Attack or condemn, no. We can disagree without
being disagreeable, as our leaders have often taught us. Let's make some small
effort to put ourselves in the shoes of those whose beliefs differ from our own.

Marie

May 5, 2008 7:20 p.m.

Shall we toss the Catholic priests and nuns out of the Family History centers?
The number one patron of the FH center in South Bend, Indiana (go Irish!) is a
Notre Dame University Priest. He's there for HOURS every day.

Even
Catholics like genealogy...

Wendy

May 5, 2008 7:20 p.m.

This is to CUTS BOTH WAYS: No, you are wrong. The LDS church would not respond
at all to FLDS re-doing temple work. Why? Because we know it would be of no
effect! They have no priesthood authority in the FLDS church to do any temple
work--or anything else for that matter.

charles

May 5, 2008 7:01 p.m.

The mormons just can't keep their nose out of other people's business, even
after they are dead.

Not a Catholic

May 5, 2008 6:56 p.m.

or LDS but some of the messages I'm reading here give me a very negative image
of the LDS.

I can easily see how it can be considered disrespectful
to the dead by their families especially if the deceased was a devout.

The Catholic Church can trace its lineage back to Jesus Christ who appointed
St. Peter as the first pope. This line of popes has continued unbroken for
almost 2,000 years and for the person that said the "worship" Mary, they revere
Mary.

As an agnostic, I don't hold the Christian system of beliefs to
be the "the truth" but obviously many here don't realize that they do the LDS a
disservice with their postings.

RE: bj

May 5, 2008 6:49 p.m.

um hmmm

Michael

May 5, 2008 6:47 p.m.

I, too, am sad this blog has become a mud-slinging session and has failed to
produce a more respectful, logical dialog.

To the non-LDS in Utah,
please realize that Mormons experience far worse discrimination in areas where
they are the minority among a predominant religion. Italy is one example, and
the slander comes from the highest levels of media and government. Please
consider this before getting so defensive. You might not have an argument to
stand on.

To the LDS in Utah, your religion promotes a higher
standard of interaction with other faiths than we've seen in this blog.

To Catholics who have touted their "sacred dead," how can you historically
make a claim that your people died believing in their faith? Catholicism is
large and powerful, but it has dealt a heavy blow of death and tyranny to become
such. Crusades, inquisitions, torture, conquistadors, Counter-reformations. It
is irrational to make such a claim for people who aren't here to speak for
themselves? So Mormons want to know about their ancestors, or they perform a
baptism for great-great-great grandma, which she can "accept or reject." What's
the big deal? How many have been forced to accept Catholicism historically?

David P

May 5, 2008 6:47 p.m.

Orion stated:

"orion | 6:19 a.m. May 4, 2008I would think there
would be a cry of outrage among the LDS folk if Catholics suddenly baptized
deceased, life-long, temple worthy, LDS members. How about church prophets? How
about those who died while in service of the LDS Church?"

Quite the
opposite is true. I wish there were something the Catholics could offer as a
countermeasure to the proxy baptism performed by the LDS faithful.

I'd gladly hand them a list of the names which I have submitted for proxy
ordinances in the LDS temple, so that the Catholic church could perform whatever
prayer or rebaptism they wished to perform.

Because I don't recognize
any such prayer or baptism as valid or binding, I see absolutely no harm in
it.

The LDS church has never sought to discourage practicing
buddhists, for example, from performing rites on behalf of Mormon, or even
Buddhist ancestors whose names have been submitted for proxy ordinances in the
LDS temple.

It's none of our affair what the Buddhists do.

However, we consider it our obligation to collect, share, and preserve vital
records for the entire family of man. We bear this enormous expense gladly.

Thomas

May 5, 2008 6:42 p.m.

"Religion," again: Keep in mind that Protestant England's repression of
Catholics occurred in the context of an age in which Englishmen who fell into
Catholic hands tended to get burned at the stake as heretics. And in which
Queen Mary's attempt to suppress the Reformation had just occasioned a fresh
round of Protestant barbecue.

As I like to say, that was then, this
is now. You can't judge people from the past with the standards of the present.
As Reformation figures go, Cromwell was pretty mild. There's no evidence that
he ordered his troops' slaughter of the defenders of Drogheda, which in any case
was permitted (shockingly enough!) by the then-accepted laws of war pertaining
to "obstinate defense."

Bottom line, I'm still glad Cromwell (and
Cranmer and Ridley and Latimer and others) made Britain a Protestant nation.
The Catholic Church had gotten out of line, and needed to be put in its place,
i.e., away from the levers of political power and back where it belonged
creating beautiful hymns, cathedrals, and intellectual theology. The Vatican
policy referenced in this article inclines me to believe the RCC hierarchy may
need another good Roundhead smackdown these days.

non-mormon here

May 5, 2008 6:41 p.m.

If you as a Mormon believe that you're going to eventially get everyone's name,
including some hunter and gatherer in... ancient Mesopotamia, for example, why
worry about some meager Catholic records if you're going to have the ability to
get the info get the name an Iraqi that lived 12,000 years ago? Non-mormons are
not getting this concept of your church.

Thomas

May 5, 2008 6:31 p.m.

Dear "Religion" -- Sorry to give you whiplash, "one moment praising the Catholic
church, and the next moment slamming it," be advised I'm sort of an
equal-opportunity offender in that respect. There is plenty to admire and
criticize in all religious traditions, including my own.

Catholicism's strengths lie in its continuity, its conservatism, and its use
of both faith *and* reason in the pursuit of religious truth. (I believe the
RCC is far superior to much of American Protestantism, with those churches'
fideistic tendencies, in that respect.)

On the other hand, it is also
true that the RCC is a powerful institution, which, in the past and occasionally
continuing to the present, has tempted it to go beyond the proper stewardship of
a kingdom that is not supposed to be of this world. I believe "Catholic social
teaching" has often interfered with democracy and rational economics, and that
cultures in which Catholic doctrines have too great an influence have tended to
fall into economic stagnation and political illiberalism. Latin America is a
classic case in point.

There's a lesson here for *any* hierarchical
church that gets too involved in political and economic culture.

Suspicious

May 5, 2008 6:26 p.m.

Why, all of a sudden, at this particular point in time, did this particular pope
make this particular decision? The LDS Church has been microfilming parish
records for decades, spanning numerous popes. This is the same pope that
enraged the Jewish community by issuing the revised "Good Friday Prayer for the
Jews" which specifically prays for the conversion of the Jews to Christianity.
There is something not quite right with this man's thinking. The Catholic
church is in serious decline, not just in the USA, but across Europe as well,
even in Italy. I suspect this will not be the last of the peculiar,
controversial pronouncements from him in some misguided attempt to save the
faith.

Curious

May 5, 2008 6:25 p.m.

What I want to know is if the dead at least get to play some baseball.

bj

May 5, 2008 6:19 p.m.

The LDS church is not copying these records specifically for baptisms.....they
are copying for the genealogy, and only if member of the Lds faith submit their
personal family members for baptism is it then done..........not as a parish, or
otherwise. they are doing this for the good of all including Catholics worldwide
wanting to trace their own roots, without submitting names for Baptism.

To whom this pertains, cont.

May 5, 2008 6:19 p.m.

Everyone who believes in Christ needs to unite. He that is divided shall fall.
There is only one way to do that! That is ask God what his will is. Is God a
liar? No! And he says, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that
giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But
let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of
the sea driven with the wind and tossed". Yet, very, very few people ever do
this. Including those in the LDS faith. If all people were to do this, all
Christians would be united. As far as Bruce R. McKonkie is concerned
saying the Catholic Church as great and abominable church. 1 NE 13. That is his
opinion. The church asked him to retract that and he did. What matters is the
revelation that comes from the first presidency. NOT individual opinions.
That's the same with MT. Meadow Massacre. The Council (the church) told them
over and over and over again "NO". Those involved acted alone not waiting even
for Brigham Youngs response to leave the wagon trains alone!

Mark

May 5, 2008 6:09 p.m.

I completely agree with the churches protection of records of the church since
releasing those records would undermine the one true baptism, as a sacrament.
Jesus had to become man in order to forgive sin and comply with the sacrament of
baptism so baptism of the deceased by proxy has no Biblical premise no matter
who self proscribes to be a prophet and come up with a new revelation/doctrine
or covenant. Jesus came once and when he comes again "for real" we will have
judgement based upon our divine nature as man, with body and soul.

To whom this pertains

May 5, 2008 5:55 p.m.

I don't think there'd be an outcry by anyone of the LDS faith if other
denominations or Satan's followers were taking names of LDS and doing their
version of baptisms because it wouldn't count. I think that if Satan's
followers were taking an interest in names at all it would be to find out who
the living saints are so they could "slayeth the saints of God, yea, and
tortureth them and bindeth them down, and yoketh them with a yoke of iron, and
bringeth them down into captivity." All followers of Satan desire captivity and
death of the righteous. It won't matter if they are catholic, baptist,
presbyterian, coJCoLDS, etc. If they are righteous, followers of Satan want them
to not have freedom, and want to seek their premature death. As those who
killed the Jews and other places. Baptisms for the dead (by proxy) isn't a
grave-robber type mentality. Somebody wrote this and I quote it, I'm
sure I don't quote it perfectly either. "He that is offended when no offense is
intended is a fool" "He that is offended when offense is intended, is a greater
fool" The problem we have as Christians: we're not united!

Hey, guess what!!!

May 5, 2008 5:49 p.m.

I'm just grateful to live in a time and a country where no one is shoving a gun
barrel, sword, or bow and arrow in my face and demanding that I accept a certain
religion as "true." Or burning me at the stake. Or torturing me for not giving
into their demands. Too bad my French Huguenot ancestors didn't have the same
situation. They had to escape to England and eventually America.

I'm
going to continue to perform proxy temple work for my ancestors, no matter what
religion they were in this life, because I believe that Jesus Christ's gospel
was founded on the truth that everyone has freedom of choice. It's my choice to
do this work, and it's my ancestors' choice to say "Thanks, I was hoping you'd
do that" or "No thanks, I'll stay my same Methodist/Presbyterian/Baptist self."

"The dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on."

Michael E. Bristow

May 5, 2008 5:48 p.m.

I'm rather suprised that Msgr. Fitzgerald would try to be so "politic" with the
Mormons. Right now the LDS Church is running so far & fast away from questions
of polygamy, that the last thing they need is to take the Catholic Church about
anything.

What's the Roman Catholic Church - a billion plus, and
the LDS make a big deal about their 12 million, world-wide. And, half of that
is overseas, so what left, 6 million in the US. That's not even half of Los
Angeles County.

I would sincerely recommend to Bishop Webster not
to be to cowardly in his relations with the Mormon Church. They are not on
solid ground right now.

torquemada

May 5, 2008 5:41 p.m.

So, if during the millenium all of the temple "work" is going to get done, why
bother with it now?

Could it be to keep the tithing dollars rolling
in??

just thiking...

May 5, 2008 5:41 p.m.

Some interesting numbers: Say you do 2 baptisms/minute, 18 hours/day, ~120
temples, 365 days/year. You'd do 94 million posthumous baptisms/year. Very
impressive. At that rate, you'd go through the entire available database (2
billion names according to lds.org newsroom) in about 20 years.

But
it gets tricky. At that rate, it would take 343 years to baptize every one of
the 32 billion humans estimated to have been born since 1,200 AD (prb.org). And
then another 778 years to get the 74 billion or so souls born before that. On
top of that, you'd have to dedicate about 80 temples just to keep up with the 60
million or so people who die each year.

I don't mean this to be
discouraging. After all, if you have faith that this work will get done, then
you won't be discouraged. I just think it could help the dialog if people inside
the LDS Church could see how preposterous this practice looks to the rest of the
world, and help you feel better that the names from the Catholic Church are
really an insignificant drop in the population bucket.

To Decider of Denominator

May 5, 2008 5:30 p.m.

, Orion and others. What happens if people get to the other side and
realize their chosen denominations wrong? The LDS church believes that God's
work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. We
believe that God so loved the world that he sent His only begotten Son that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. Yet on
this earth they believe in Him but they are kept from salvation due to a
technicality-the ordinance of baptism. Then, if they are given the opportunity,
no technicality can keep them from God's promises. God is all powerful, wise,
all-loving, etc. and because of that, has given everyone the opportunity to be
saved in one of three kingdoms-which have many mansions in each. It
doesn't matter that the catholics hold back their records because the Savior is
soon coming for the second time and when he does, 1,000 years will be dedicated
to this work and no hindering will happen. Those who reject (telestial beings)
won't be on the earth and won't be saved for this 1,000 years and those who
don't reject will be here physically to do the work.

Sally

May 5, 2008 5:27 p.m.

Jeepers, Is there a religious freedom problem on here or what? I don't think the
dead care one way or another if someone wants to do work for them...BIG DEAL!
Who cares? I'd like to know how its going to "personally" harm any of you?

Gary

May 5, 2008 5:08 p.m.

Bruce R. McKonkie said the Catholic Church is the "Great and Abominable Church
of the Devil." Why should the greatest and oldest Christian denomination on the
planet cut a small startup sect any slack. Also, the LDS Church sends out
missionaries to steal away Catholic converts in third world countries without
providing anything with regard to social justice.

Religion

May 5, 2008 5:08 p.m.

When reading the comments in this thread, I find that religion does nothing to
improve the moral good will of humans. Instead of focusing on the sky, let's
bring ourselves back to earth and rid ourselves of religious dogma.

Does Thomas know anything about the history of anti-Catholic sentiment among
Protestants in England and the cruelty involved? Wow! One moment you're
praising the Catholic church, and next moment slamming it.

I'm
convinced that religious is the source of much of what's wrong the world. If
the Catholic Church had reigned over England, England would probably have been
just as cruel as they were as Protestants.

ME

May 5, 2008 4:56 p.m.

Dear "It wouldn't be offensive":

It wouldn't be offensive to YOU if
someone were to baptize you into some other church. Why draw on your morality
solely on the basis of reference to the way you experience the world and honor
the dead and their immediate families by using the dead person's name in a
religious ceremony of the dead?

It strikes me as rude to insist on
using the name of anyone for their religious purposes.

Thomas

May 5, 2008 4:55 p.m.

"To Alex" -- "The LDS Trinity and the Christian Trinity are not the same.
Look it up."

I *have* looked it up, and researched the Nicene and
Athanasian Creeds backwards and forwards. My considered conclusion is that both
sides are exaggerating the differences: the Mormons, to gin up a need for a
"restoration" of important doctrines on which traditional Christianity was in
error, and traditional Christians, because they think Mormons are weird and just
hate having secularists tar all religionists with the same kooky brush.

The bottoml line is that Mormons believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are
separate persons, who are nevertheless one God in some mystical sense.
Hairsplitting aside, that's pretty much the traditional Christian position, too.
Such a lot of fighting over stuff nobody truly knows anything about.

Don't get me started on Elder Holland's infamous mistranslation of the word
"immensus" in the Athanasian Creed. Short version: It doesn't mean
"incomprehensible" in the modern sense of "impossible to be understood."

Thomas

May 5, 2008 4:46 p.m.

Mark -- I offer my comment on Oliver Cromwell in the same spirit as the Vatican
offered its thumb to the eye of the LDS Church on the baptism issue. I say the
descendants of the Inquisitors have something of a log in their own eye getting
the vapors over references to Cromwell.

As much as I admire the
present Catholic Church as the custodian of a magnificent intellectual and
spiritual tradition, and as virtually the last keeper of the flickering
Christian flame in Europe, I am heartily glad that the English-speaking world
gave Rome the heave-ho during the Reformation. As nasty as both sides in the
Reformation got (and Cromwell's acts at Drogheda, though exaggerated by Catholic
propagandists, would never be countenanced today), I am convinced that the right
side won in England, and that Anglo-American civilization would have been much
the worse for having continued as a Catholic society.

Catholic Homer

May 5, 2008 4:41 p.m.

The Mormon Church has around fourteen million members, whereas the Catholic
Church has over one billion. They can't even be mentioned in the same universe.
The Catholic Church is also two thousand years old.

Family On Earth

May 5, 2008 4:40 p.m.

I believe life as we know it as we experience it with our families should be our
focus, not a belief in an after life. What better way to honor a family
member than to abide by the wishes of that dead family member as the family knew
him on earth. What better way to honor the immediate family member than to
honor their wishes?

For The Love...

May 5, 2008 4:38 p.m.

For the love, folks, show a little respect and humility in what you post for the
world to read. I am active LDS, but Mormons do not have the market cornered on
goodness or spirituality, nor do we have a free pass to ignore the often
understandable concerns of those not of our faith.

Your church
leaders would never encourage you to defend your faith in the manner that many,
if not most, of the posters here are attempting. It does much more harm than
good.

Explain, yes. Attack or condemn, no. We can disagree without
being disagreeable, as our leaders have often taught us. Let's make some small
effort to put ourselves in the shoes of those whose beliefs differ from our own.

Brother Chuck Schroeder

May 5, 2008 4:37 p.m.

Perhaps the Vatican representatives should know about this and ALLOW their
Priest's and all other males to get married to a woman. Remember, the
disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and
nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets. That's why
Republican's as well as "normal people" call upon other responsible citizens and
officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain
and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

Howard

May 5, 2008 4:36 p.m.

What a shame! So just because my Chinese ancestors never accepted Christ while
they were alive, they are out of luck?

"Get it right NOW" suggests
that they, along with the MAJORITY of humans since the race began are all
consigned to Hell because the never even heard of Christ. That is merciful.

As for Catholic records, they own them. It is their choice. That is
agency.

People...come now

May 5, 2008 4:31 p.m.

Folks, what do you think is going to be going on in the Millennium? It's going
to be a 1000 years of genealogy work.

It really matters not if the
Catholics or any other church gives up their names or not. They will be known in
the Millennium and then the temple work will be done for them.

It's
really cute and dried or in other words, plain and simple.

Catholics
worship Mary. That's not in the scriptures. There version of the "trinity" isn't
found in scripture. There version of baby baptism isn't in scripture. all of
their rituals aren't found in scripture.

you know what is in
scripture? Baptisms for the dead. Ever read 1 Peter 3:19? Will a Catholic
believer please explain that scripture?

BTW, I don't know where this
doing temple work is an act of "love" came from. For some, I'm sure doing their
own family names it is a wonderful experience. However, it's a commandment and
it has to be done no matter what.

AND, those who have died don't have
an easier time of accepting the gospel versus those on the earth. Where did that
come from?

Alex

May 5, 2008 4:29 p.m.

"The LDS Trinity and Christian Trinity are not the same. Look it up. "

I know. I was only answering Thomas statement to the effect that we only
baptize in the name of the Son. We are baptized in the name of the Father, and
of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Three separate beings who are one in every
other way other than being the same person. I know what the Trinity as defined
by the early church councils is.

Wow Indeed

May 5, 2008 4:27 p.m.

Why does competing religious dogmas stir up so much division of among people?
Aren't we ultimately human beings before anything we are member of a belief
system? We can't we get together and focus on concerns facing us in the real
world, all together, not as a group of Mormons, Catholics, etc in their separate
religious groups, but as a group of human beings concerned with issues all
people are concerned out, and let the standard be the evidence of our collective
efforts to spread goodness in the world.

Instead of getting together
to focus on life as we know it on this planet, lots of people prefer arguing
over baptism. Why? I personally believe that issues we experience are more
important than talk of an after life. Don't you?

to to alex

May 5, 2008 4:26 p.m.

you are right, they are not the same. Can you please scripturally corroborate
the Catholic version of God, Christ and the Holy Ghost for us? I don't want you
to use the Nicene Creed. I want you to use the scriptures where is says all 3
are 1 person....

I'll give you some hints...use the verses where
Christ is baptized..or use the one of the Mount of Transfiguration...or use the
one of the Intercessory Prayer....

Please, I'd like for you to
scripturally tell us the Catholic version of the Trinity...

My family

May 5, 2008 4:17 p.m.

You people are fighting about nothing. If you go back 6-10 generations or so, on
most Mormon lines their are Catholic lines of people who are direct lines that
come back down to a particular Mormon person. So if the Mormon person has
ancestors who were all Catholics and then this particular Mormon descender
chooses to do work for the dead on his direct ancestors, who were all Catholic
and Jewish, then he definitely has the right as a Mormon to do work for them
because THEY ARE HIS FAMILY! I am a eight generation Mormon and I DIRECTLY have
family lines back to Jewish and Catholic families, and as well, being a
descendant of (Theologian Protestant Reformer) Martin Luther. These are my
"direct" ancestors, so indeed, I will do the work within the Mormon church for
"MY FAMILY". Does anyone have any objections to this?

elliot

May 5, 2008 4:17 p.m.

These comments from both sides of the spectrum should be an eye-opener for us
all.

Religion brings out the worst in people. I will let you sit
here and fight about who has the correct baptism. When will we learn?

I can't wait until these ancient religions die down and the new ones start,
maybe they will actually practice what they teach.

Macka

May 5, 2008 4:09 p.m.

sjc!

One church recognising another's baptism may happen. However,
this is not correct doctrine. Paul himself re-baptised a number of men as they
had not been baptised by one holding the correct authority.

Acts 19:
1-51 AND it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having
passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain
disciples,2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye
believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be
any Holy Ghost.3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized?
And they said, Unto John's baptism.4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized
with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe
on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.5 When they
heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.6 And when
Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake
with tongues, and prophesied. Clearly there is need to be baptized by the
correct authority.

Hit a Nerve

May 5, 2008 4:03 p.m.

Wow, this story sure has HIT A NERVE!! I don't think I've ever seen this many
comments on a single story. This is just a little opposition. The Lord is able
to do His own work.

To Alex:

May 5, 2008 4:01 p.m.

The LDS Trinity and Christian Trinity are not the same. Look it up.

larry

May 5, 2008 4:01 p.m.

After reading and reading and reading on this forum I would like to declare that
the Catholic church has every right to its records. Logical, eh.

PS
-- I am not a Catholic.

Andrew,/ Re: LDS Mom

May 5, 2008 3:59 p.m.

Yes, it is arrogant for those of you who decide that these old twelve white guys
in Temple Square are "authorized" to baptize my parents and relatives who died
in the Holocaust into a religion they would never accept no matter how "loving a
gift" you seem to think it is. Keep your beliefs to yourself and other clones.
I and just about everyone I know doesn't want to hear your tired old dogma.

"Mormons do not baptize in the name of the Father, Son
and Holy Spirit. I believe the LDS baptize in Jesus name only. "

Actually we do each and every time, and we have been doing it in the name of
the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost from the very beginning.

Even so, it doesn't bother me that Catholics don't accept my baptism.
Heck, I don't accept their baptism either. Its nothing personal. None of this,
however, has never stopped me from having plenty of friends from other faiths.

Religion aside

May 5, 2008 3:44 p.m.

Regardless of beliefs, in today's society of access and open information,
particularly in the area of finding out who your ancestors are, this decision to
close access to members of a specific religion seems selfish and small minded.
If I had information in my possession about who someone's parents, great
grandparents or other ancestors were I would certainly share that information
freely with them. It hardly seems Christ like or loving to close that door on
people who want to know who their ancestors were, for whatever reason.

no respecter of persons

May 5, 2008 3:41 p.m.

God is no respecter of persons. LDS doctrine teaches that everyone who has ever
lived deserves the right to accept or reject the gospel of Jesus Christ and its
saving ordinances.

Members work diligently to trace their ancestral
lines and to perform these ordinances on behalf of their deceased ancestors,
respecting their right to accept or reject these ordinances.

My
question to those who question this practice is what right do you have on behalf
of your ancestors to reject this opportunity for them to choose?

dispatches from for-mon

May 5, 2008 3:33 p.m.

"...People are only baptized if a family member brings the record, not in
blanket style. These are not performed by the church but rather individuals who
are related to the person. If a person feels it important to perform a certain
act for a deceased ancestor out of love then I do not understand the
outrage..."

My wife, a former Mormon (Praise God for that!), reports
that as a teenager, she did temple work as part of a LDS youth group, which
specifically included 'baptisms for the dead'; she says she knew none of the
people on the list and that none of them were her ancestors nor members of her
family.

Alex

May 5, 2008 3:33 p.m.

Mark:

"Your reference to Cromwell was mean-spirited. "

I'll second that. I am hoping that what Thomas was trying to say didn't come
out right. Oliver Cromwell is rightly a very sensitive issue for Catholics.

Naive

May 5, 2008 3:32 p.m.

The bottom line is this: It is naive to think the Catholic Church considers the
LDS Church a threat or pays any attention to our comments regarding their
actions. The Vatican runs an organization with a population four times the size
of the population of the US. The Pope signs numerous documents on a regular
basis, and this is probably already old news. To the Vatican, the issue of
church records is most likely no more than a minor irritant coming from a tiny
US-based religious group that is but a blip on the radar screen to the Catholic
Church. To put it into perspective, Catholic church growth has slowed to one
percent a year, or 12 million new members a year. That is the size of our entire
LDS Church.

Shoes

May 5, 2008 3:29 p.m.

Of course the LDS would be offend if the situation were reversed. A few years
ago a stupid basketball player insulted the mormons, and people went ballistic.
They wrote letter after angry letter to the papers demanding he apologize. They
felt very persecuted. They looked like idiots.

If another religion
was baptizing LDS dead, and proclaiming that the LDS dead needed the ordinance
to be saved, we'd see the same kind of thing happen.

The
near-complete inability of Utah mormons to put themselves in someone else's
shoes staggers the mind.

re: Thomas | 1:41 p.m

May 5, 2008 3:27 p.m.

"The Roman Catholic Church doesn't recognize LDS baptisms as valid, and requires
converts from Mormonism to Catholicism to be rebaptized. Since the RCC does not
single out Protestant baptisms as similarly invalid, I can't help but to see
this as an arrogant, unfriendly act."

As far as I know, most
christian churches, as well as the Catholic church do not recognize the
authority of Mormon baptism. It is not meant to be an unfriendly act, as you
say...but rooted in the trinitarian belief. This is why some baptisms from
other churches are in fact, recognized. Mormons do not baptize in the name of
the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe the LDS baptize in Jesus name only.

Those spirits you are saving, have already chosen or not chosen to
be saved. It is an offensive and elitist view to think that you can save them
from their Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheist...etc, beliefs. They have already
made those choices while they were living. Mormon baptism does not supersede
all others, and Christian churches/Jewish synagogues do find it very offensive
that you take it upon yourselves to baptize their faithful deceased members into
a non-christian or non-judaism religion...without anyone's consent.

get it right NOW

May 5, 2008 3:27 p.m.

The Bible is clear that death is the end of all chances. Hebrews 9:27 tells us
that we die, and then face judgment. So, as long as a person is alive, he has a
second, third, fourth, fifth, etc. chance to accept Christ and be saved (John
3:16; Romans 10:9-10; Acts 16:31). Once a person dies, there are no more
chances.

What about those who do not believe? Wouldnt they repent and
believe if they were given a second chance? The answer is no, they would not
because their hearts are not changed simply because they die. Their hearts and
minds are at enmity against God and wont accept Him even when they see Him face
to face. This is evidenced clearly in the story of the rich man and Lazarus in
Luke 16:19-31.

sheesh

May 5, 2008 3:24 p.m.

Oh Please. Blah blah blah The true church blah blah blah Listen. The Catholics
1 billion. Mormons including the Fundamental, maybe 10 million. You are
insignficant to them thats why your not getting the records. They don't care. It
has nothing to do with being threatened by you. It's like a butterfly on an
elephant. They don't even notice it. Sorry. But it's true.

LDSmom

May 5, 2008 3:23 p.m.

To "To Julie":

**I wonder how you would feel if a group that you
thought was a cult, say The Church of Satan, baptised your family into their
Church. Would you like it??? I am not saying anything against the LDS Church, I
am saying that many would find it understandably offensive.**

Wouldn't phase us as we believe our baptisms are the only ones done by those
who hold true & authorized priesthood authority.

Which Way? How Far?

May 5, 2008 3:18 p.m.

The Late Pope John Paul II was known for getting along with others worldwide.
He did alot to BUILD Bridges of understanding and respect. The LateGordon
B. Hinckley also did alot to BUILD Bridges of understanding and respect. I'm
sure that President Thomas S. Monson will follow in Gordon B. Hinckley'sway of doing things, but it looks like Pope Benedict 13 is going in the
opposite direction. Going in the reverse direction is a form of
"Fundamentalist" type thinking. Warren Jeffs andhis followers do not OWN
the word "Fundamentalist".Extreme "Fundamentalism..." is VERY Dangerous.
It robs respect and dignity of the individual and throws up "walls" of
disrespect, intolerance, andbigotry. The Warren Jeffs group has gone a
very long way in that directiion --WELL PAST Respect of civil laws and obedience
to those civil laws.

"Extreme" Muslim Fundamentalism thought it was
OKand actually desirable to fly airplanes into tall buildings in New York
City on 9/11. Extreme "Fundamentalism" of anything is extremelyDANGEROUS.

How far is Pope Benedict 13 going in the Fundamentalist direction??
Will it go to the point of a Fundamentalist Catholic Church?

I Hope
Not.

Mark

May 5, 2008 3:17 p.m.

@ Nick Hudson:

The Church does submit names in mass groupings for
temple work. Have you ever heard of the name extraction program? Our stake
submits tens of thousands of Spanish names each year. And we aren't related to
them directly in any sense.

Mark

May 5, 2008 3:12 p.m.

@ Thomas 1:41 p.m:

Your reference to Cromwell was mean-spirited.

For those who don't know, Oliver Cromwell butchered Catholics in Ireland
and Scotland in the 17th century. Many LDS would be offended if someone said
"Where are Gov. Boggs and the mobsters when you need them?"

Nick Hudson

May 5, 2008 3:10 p.m.

I still don't understand the shame in doing it or the outrage at someone
disallowing it. People are only baptized if a family member brings the record,
not in blanket style. These are not performed by the church but rather
individuals who are related to the person. If a person feels it important to
perform a certain act for a deceased ancestor out of love then I do not
understand the outrage. As a family member it seems their right. At the same
time, if a group does not want their records to be used then that is their
choice and should be respected. I just don't understand why we are so quick to
disgust and slow to understand.

LDSmom

May 5, 2008 3:06 p.m.

**I would think there would be a cry of outrage among the LDS folk if Catholics
suddenly baptized deceased, life-long, temple worthy, LDS members. How about
church prophets? How about those who died while in service of the LDS Church?

It is the height of arrogance to claim the "souls" of those like Joan of
Arc, Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul II, and anyone else who lived worthy lives
dedicated to their own faiths. It is a matter of respect.**

It's of
no concern to us if those of other religions want to baptize our dead as we
believe we have the full truth & our baptisms are the only ones performed by the
proper & authorized authority bestowed by God on worthy priesthood holders.

No, it's not arrogance. It's LDS people offering a saving ordinance
that others have the right to accept or reject in the next life. The majority
of those others will be eternally grateful that this was done for them.

Re: Andrew

May 5, 2008 3:06 p.m.

"I find it sickening, arrogant and disrespectful for the LDS church to
posthumously baptize people who would never have done so during their
lifetime."

How do you know they wouldn't accept this gift of love if
they were given an opportunity to study the gospel in an unbiased, completely
open setting, such as the place where all spirits go when they depart this
life?

Members of the LDS church perform these ordinances for their
own ancestors. The last thing they would want to do is to disrespect those
ancestors. We care just as much about those ancestors as people from other
faiths do.

Alex

May 5, 2008 3:00 p.m.

tired of the bashing:

"baptizing the dead is simply unture to
catholic scripture. thats why they are not allowing it. maybe they consider it
blasphemy. "

Thats fine, but why have they been allowing us to
microfilm the records all this time? It is not like they didn't know what we
did. I want to be clear that I have nothing but the highest respect for Pope
Benedict XVI. I've loved his strong stance on many issues. Moreover, the
Catholic Church has been very helpful and generous in the past with regards to
giving us access to their records. That is why I am a bit confused with all of
this.

Ammon

May 5, 2008 2:56 p.m.

I wish everyone would just calm down and trust the Lord, He will do what needs
to be done for His kingdom. Is anything too hard for the Lord? This is nothing
for Him to take care of. "What power can stay the heavens? As well might man
stretch forth his puny arm to stop the Missouri river in its decreed course, or
to turn it up stream, as to hinder the Almighty from pouring down knowledge from
heaven." D&C 121:33

To me, this will allow the Lord to provide a
miracle, I can't wait!

Andrew

May 5, 2008 2:49 p.m.

As a Jew, I find it sickening, arrogant and disrespectful for the LDS church to
posthumously baptize people who would never have done so during their lifetime.
I know about the church baptizing dead Holocaust victims so it doesn't surprise
me that they are trampling on others' graves. For shame!

Connie

May 5, 2008 2:45 p.m.

Just tell me, Is there any religion out there doesn't bash another religion?
NOPE! All religions BASH each other. Everyone of them is true, but none of them
are truthful. So I say, forget all of them, and just be a nice guy. Basically
life is based on 2 things..Good and Evil. Its all up to each individual to
choose thier own path. Religion has nothing to do with who you truly are.

If the Catholics want to be stinky and stingy with records-- so who
cares! Perhaps the LDS church should charge admission to their Family research
center...just kidding!

tired of the bashing

May 5, 2008 2:40 p.m.

baptizing the dead is simply unture to catholic scripture. thats why they are
not allowing it. maybe they consider it blasphemy. but in the p.c. world we live
in maybe the church doesn't want to say it in a way to hurt anyones feeling.
even if those persons feelings may mean more to them than what may be sciptually
correct.

LDSmom

May 5, 2008 2:23 p.m.

Chris:

*Did the Catholic church also decide to refuse LDS
humanitarian aid in the future?*

Would kind of serve them right but
of course the church wouldn't turn down anyone who needed aid regardless of
their religion.

*I guess I can see the Catholic church's point--if
my version of "truth" did not include a doctrinal ordinance clearly mentioned
(and practiced) in the New Testament times, I might have some "grave
reservations" too.*

LOL, that was very cleverly worded. :=)

By-Mexico

May 5, 2008 2:18 p.m.

For at least fifty years the LDS church has been micofilming the genelogical
records of the Catholic Church and municipal records in Mexico. The quid pro quo
was that a copy of the micorfilm is given to the Catholic church as a permanent
record since the written records tend to decompose and are lost. There are two
parties who loose in this decision besides those who desire the records for
geneological purposes. The decision is short sighted when issued for the
reasons given.

Nick Hudson

May 5, 2008 2:16 p.m.

I would say that, despite my personal wishing that the Catholic Church would not
close the records, the fact reamins that they do own them. That means that they
can use them or not allow them to be used as they wish. We can make doctrinal
arguments all day in regards to the rationality of the decision but, as the
owners of the records, the Catholic Church has every right to close those
records.

porky

May 5, 2008 2:09 p.m.

what's the point of prohibiting something (proxy baptism) you don't believe in
(Mormonism) anyway? Are they afraid there just might be some truth in the LDS
faith?

Last time I checked

May 5, 2008 2:09 p.m.

the ordinance of baptism for the dead was proxy or "in name only". Seems that
many people on here feel like it's an actual event with the body and all. Every
time the Pope prays for everyone in the world, he is praying to God for me (a
Mormon). Should I take offense at that?

Alex

May 5, 2008 2:06 p.m.

Catholic Me:

"It is precisely BECAUSE we understand your doctrine of
baptism for the dead, and precisely BECAUSE we think your temple rites are bogus
and wrong that we oppose your access to our records! "

If that is
true, that is all the more reason why it shouldn't matter to the Catholic
Church. If what we are doing is bogus, it will ultimately have no effect, will
it. So why worry?

James Gaede

May 5, 2008 2:06 p.m.

To Just Me and Biblical Practice:

please read 1 Peter 3:19-20, for
what purpose did Christ preach to the spirits that were dead if baptism for the
dead is invalid.

RE: Get Real

May 5, 2008 1:49 p.m.

Maybe the arrogant attitude you have saying others baptisms are just "taking a
bath" is the reason the Catholic church is taking a hard stance.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 1:43 p.m.

To 'Cuts both ways':

**Would it bother mormons if let's say the FLDS
were re-doing the temple ordinances because they figured the mainstream LDS had
gone astray.

The LDS church would be all over that like white on
rice. So why be surprised that other churches don't like the LDS church doing
the same?**

No, wouldn't bother us/LDS at all as the FLDS can't &
don't use our temples. They'd have to join our church & be worthy of a temple
recommend before they'd ever be allowed to attend a temple. They can redo
whatever they want in their own temples...as LDS members it doesn't matter to us
as we are a totally seperate religion from them.

Thomas

May 5, 2008 1:41 p.m.

The Roman Catholic Church doesn't recognize LDS baptisms as valid, and requires
converts from Mormonism to Catholicism to be rebaptized. Since the RCC does not
single out Protestant baptisms as similarly invalid, I can't help but to see
this as an arrogant, unfriendly act.

In any event, if the RCC doesn't
recognize LDS baptisms as valid, it shouldn't be insulted that the LDS view RCC
baptisms as invalid, and therefore practice baptism for the dead.

Where's Cromwell when you need him?

Catholic Me

May 5, 2008 1:36 p.m.

Will you Mormons stop the deception already!!? It is NOT TRUE that Catholics "do
not understand baptism for the dead"! We understand completely! It is NOT TRUE
that we believe your baptisms are legitimate and that is why we oppose them!
Your "priesthood" is a false priesthood and has no legitimacy whatsoever. It is
precisely BECAUSE we understand your doctrine of baptism for the dead, and
precisely BECAUSE we think your temple rites are bogus and wrong that we oppose
your access to our records!

Stop the spin! Stop the games! Just leave
our sacred dead alone!

jt

May 5, 2008 1:26 p.m.

that is why i do not believe in orgainized religion. Jesus was not orgainized,
He was spontaneous. He was charismatic. He did not write sermons. He spoke with
his heart. You Lds take things out of concept. The bible guides you, not men.

Get Real!

May 5, 2008 1:25 p.m.

Many have stated that we as LDS would be upset if our ancestors were baptized in
other churches after they were dead. I can guarantee that almost all faithful
LDS people couldn't care less! We know that ordinances done without the real
authority of God mean nothing, thus they would just be taking a bath with a
name, not really baptizing anything.

And do you really think Jesus
would say, "Well you lived a Christ-Like life and would have got into heaven,
but it looks like 350 years after you died someone baptized you in a different
church so you're screwed."????????

Not a dead mormon...yet

May 5, 2008 1:23 p.m.

No wonder the LDS have 13 million members and growing. People die every day!

Alex

May 5, 2008 1:20 p.m.

olive:

"It completely undermines a person's decisions that they make
in life to baptize them when they are dead. "

If you don't want
baptism there, the ordinance becomes null and void. That is your choice. No
decision is undermined. That has always been the doctrine too. As one who has
done her research, you ought to have known that.

Dave

May 5, 2008 1:19 p.m.

Good luck researching any ancestor who lived in a country where the Catholic
church was the official records keeping body of the state gov't!

Genealogist

May 5, 2008 1:17 p.m.

@Disgusted: When this is not a question of money, please explain why a lot of
microfilms with catholic records are restricted for the use outside of europe
since the 70`s? What is the difference between a LDS Member in the US who wants
to baptize his ancestors an a LDS in europe? BTW: I`m not a LDS, i`m catholic. A
visit to a family history center costs minimum 8,50 for one film (3 Months)
including thepermission to take pictures, the visit in a catholic archive starts
with a fee 5,50 just for sitting there an 2 books to view mostly without the
permission to take pictures (for 1 Day). Any additional book costs 2 . [Fees
may varie from archive to archive]. Ironically they are sometimes (because
of saving the old books) giving out microfilm copies of the LDS to visitors.
It`s the only please in europe to use them, because of their own restrictions.
Will they stop using the microfilm copies because theyre from the LDS?

Interesting

May 5, 2008 1:10 p.m.

There seems to be a misunderstanding of LDS temple practices. No dead person is
being forced to join the LDS Church in the afterlife. They are being offered the
opportunity one last time, and one assumes that it might be a bit more
convincing after they are dead.

It is sad that the Catholic Church is
cutting off this resource to both LDS and non-LDS people alike, but ultimately
it is their choice and I am sure the LDS Church will respect their decision if
no compromise can be reached.

Have Shoah victims been baptized
against the wishes of the many branches of Judaism? Yes. Did the LDS Church
order this to be done? No. But it can't control what every single individual
member does.

If the Jehovah's Witnesses would like to try converting
me after I'm dead, they are welcome to do it. I can't say that what doesn't
bother me won't bother other people, though. I am sure that God will work
everything out in the end, He being omnipotent and all.

I am saddened
to see so many cruel words here towards both the LDS and the Catholics. Christ
preached love, not bigotry, snide comments and hate.

David Bradley

May 5, 2008 1:08 p.m.

Sj Bobkins said, "If the Catholic church believes that the LDS Church is in
error, what does it matter?"

To this I say that it matters greatly!
The god(s) of the Mormon Church is(are) NOT the God of the Catholic Church. We
are warned by God the Father in the commandments not to put any other god above
him. We are warned in Deuteronomy 32 not to get involved with pagan or other
"gods" and that any power behind those gods was based on demonic powers hostile
to God. Giving in to these rituals and saying they have no detrimental effect is
proven to be a poor decision by the fact that some Catholics are already
convinced that dabbling with this false god is harmless.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 1:05 p.m.

Maybe they are mad the LDS won't baptize the infants they didn't get around
to?

Funny, no scriptural reference on that one.

kg

May 5, 2008 1:04 p.m.

Pardon me for not reading 9 pages of comments - I hope more information comes
out on this one way or the other cause I don't know how the Catholic Church
intends to determine who is LDS. Unless they use blanket stereotypes of anyone
from Utah, last name of Smith, etc... Will they require background checks or
copies of membership?

Dave McPhail

May 5, 2008 1:04 p.m.

Having worked for the Family History Dept. of The LDS Church for over 18 years,
and having done genealogical research using Catholic parish registers in that
research as well as producing presentations focusing on the collection of
Catholic records already microfilmed. . . I can say this is a sad (and already
seen illogical move) move by the Catholic Church. BUT- the Family History
Library already has a TON of already microfilmed Catholic parish registers.
Most of what the library DOESN'T have is from parishes that historically don't
want their register microfilmed anyway. . . so it's all a moot point.

jt

May 5, 2008 1:04 p.m.

i would be horrified if someone tried to baptize my grandmother mormon. she was
a very devout christian and i know i will be with her in heaven. i do not
understand why the LDS believe there are seperate heavens. i never read that in
the bible. probably because it is untrue. i will continue to pray for your
salvation, all LDS. Only God knows the truth. No man made religion whether it
be LDS or catholic know. God does not segregate.

Ben

May 5, 2008 1:01 p.m.

I want to make a few points.

I don't understand what is wrong with
family members that love those that have passed on and want to provide them with
the opportunity to be baptized into the church that they believe is true.

I don't understand why people are getting upset and offend that family
members want to do this posthumous baptism that give their ancestors a
choice.

I have tried to see this from their point of view. I have
thought to myself. If I died and I had members of my family of another faith
pray for me or provide some other act of love or service that they believed
would help me after my death. I would feel loved.

Paul

May 5, 2008 1:00 p.m.

I am LDS. We must respect each other's beliefs. This was a decision by the
Catholic church, and we will respect it. Practice charity folks. Live your
religion!

Dear The Gift

May 5, 2008 12:59 p.m.

The gift you are talking about exists as nothing else but fiction, which is why
the gifts is truly meaningless. No one accepts or chooses the gift because when
you die...well, you die. It comes with the territory.

Dee Pearce

May 5, 2008 12:57 p.m.

For many years, the churchs, Catholic or Protestant, were the only record
keepers, they were the "state archives." What may result from this decision is
the blocking of access by family history researchers to the only source of
records about their families. How will a parish priest or other Catholic record
keeper know if he is being approached by a "forbidden user", are all researchers
to be asked whether they are LDS? I suspect Catholic nations may have to step in
an remind the Catholic Church that while they kept the records, they did so as a
state agency. By adopting this position, the Catholic Church may be inviting
government intervention which they might wish to avoid. Will national archives
that have taken possession of Catholic records to preserve them as "state
records" comply with the Catholic hope that the LDS will not be given access to
those records? I doubt it.

DEAR JD:

May 5, 2008 12:57 p.m.

All religions are man made.

Religious Tension

May 5, 2008 12:53 p.m.

The Mormon Church should respect the wishes of Catholics' and stop baptizing
their dead. Actually, they should respect everyone's wishes about this matter,
regardless of religion.

I find it odd the LDS Church's to practice
superstition trumps the wishes of those who don't want their relatives names
used for their purposes.

Alex

May 5, 2008 12:53 p.m.

Disgusted:

Have you ever prayed for anyone's soul? Have you ever
wanted something for someone else that they don't have--something of great value
to you? If you have, you obviously must be elitist, arrogant, critical,
condescending, self-righteous and unscrupulous, just like me. If doing work for
the dead makes me all these things, then I am guilty as charged. So what.

Look, we aren't taking control of any records. The Catholic Church
still owns them. We are photographing them, documenting them, transcribing
them, and digitizing them. They are available to all. Certainly, we have our
purposes in doing the work for them, yet none of the work we do is or ever has
been invasive of anyone's freedom to choose. We are not hurting anyone. We are
not cursing anyone. If we are false, then none of the dead have anything to
worry about, will they. If we are true, then none of the dead have anything to
worry about either.

meri

May 5, 2008 12:45 p.m.

To Orion, It Cuts Both Ways, and all the others who think the same way:

It would not bother me in the least if the FLDS redid the ordinance work for
my ancestors or any of the prophets. It would not bother me in the least if the
Catholic church declared one of them a Saint. It would not bother me if any or
all of them were baptized into another church.

I would simply
acce3pt it as a sign of love, respect, and caring, but nothing more. Because I
don't believe that any of those things mean anything, they can do it all they
want. They can light candles, cannonize them, or do whatever in their names.

It is amazing to me that people don't understand that, whether they are
in the church or not.

jt

May 5, 2008 12:39 p.m.

so in other words you all are saying that it is ok to tell a 17 year old
mentally handicapped child (by missionaries) that she is not baptized as she was
baptized by a christian minister and not a mormon? that is a bunch of garbage.
they told my daughter that and i cried as they are so misguided. the only thing
that christians are afraid of that has to do with the LDS church is that you are
misled and need to see the truth and if you don't then you will pay the price.
I know in my spirit and my heart His truth.

olive

May 5, 2008 12:34 p.m.

As a Catholic who was ALMOST baptized mormon before I did some research I must
say that I wholeheartedly support this decision. Of course mormons won't
understand why people don't want to join their church. If I wanted to join I
would actually open the door to the missionaries when they come knocking on the
door all the time. There' my answer, "NO." I also don't need my children or
otherwise thinking that I might have made a mistake and baptize me when I'm
already dead. I've already been baptized and have made my decisions for myself.
It completely undermines a person's decisions that they make in life to baptize
them when they are dead. If a person or their religion choose not to make it
easier to let mormons baptize their parishioners then it's their decision. It's
all about respect and a doing your dealings honestly.

jt

May 5, 2008 12:34 p.m.

the church records for any church is none of any other man made religions
business. only Jesus knows and yes, there is only one heaven, read your bibles.

LDS library

May 5, 2008 12:32 p.m.

I am not permitted to look at every record in the lds library either.

The Gift

May 5, 2008 12:31 p.m.

I fail to see why sharing a spiritual gift with an ancestor should cause anyone
grief.

For those who don't believe in the gift, the gift is
meaningless.

For those who do believe in the gift, the person being
offered the gift still has the choice to accept or reject the gift.

Tom Rod

May 5, 2008 12:27 p.m.

Ok, things are way off base here. Here is an objective view of the matter.

The LDS church feels very strongly that they must baptize and seal all
the folks that that anyone on earth has record of, getting back to Adam if they
can.

Catholic folk take offense to this, as the LDS Church uses
their records in lieu of any other records to establish birth/death/wedding
dates, etc. Perhaps they see acquiescing these records as acknowledgment that
the LDS Church has authority, which threatens their hegemony on claims of
authority.

LDS Folk don't see what the big deal is, because if they
lack authority, all is moot, and if they don't, then they're right and they
really are saving souls from the damnation of stagnation.

So really
this is a power play over hegemony of authority. Only one can be true. If the
Catholic is right, the Protestants are all wrong since they broke off a dead
branch. If the LDS are right, then the Protestants are still wrong since the
authority was lost and can't be restored through good feelings.

Thinking of this makes me think of the Rocky soundtrack. Weird eh? Hope this
works itself out.

Disgusted

May 5, 2008 12:22 p.m.

I cant believe all the posters that think this is somehow about the Catholic
Church wanting money. Your accusations are vulgar and despicable. This is
about a theological difference and a response to worldwide complaints of LDS
baptizing deceased members of another faith. People of other faiths are not
beneath you, and clamoring to be baptized into your one and only true church.
This erroneous practice smacks of elitism and arrogance, and you have absolutely
no entitlement to do anything with the records, let alone take over control and
maintenance as some here have suggested. I read pages of posts and I am
disgusted and dismayed. Youve illustrated a depressing example of LDS members
who are critical, condescending, self-righteous and unscrupulous.

Faith needed

May 5, 2008 12:12 p.m.

I truly believe that most Catholics are good hearted people who would give
willingly of their substance to help another. LDS people would likewise be as
generous. If only they could see the true intent here.....love. Perhaps the
Catholic church is showing some true colors here. Unfortunately, it is a hard
thing to change once it is committed.

How frustrating

May 5, 2008 12:12 p.m.

It is sad but true, the parish records of the Catholic Church DO belong to the
Catholic Church. They can do with them what they will.This will be
frustrating to the many Catholics who want to do their own geneology, as
Geneological Research is Europe's number one hobbie.The Catholic Church is
the owner of a great many other historical texts of all kinds, that would be of
extreme value to the rest of the world. and they won't "turn those over",
either. That is just the way it is. It is THEIR PROPERTY.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 12:10 p.m.

They will remain hidden along with the priest sodomy evidence.

Verl Doman

May 5, 2008 12:07 p.m.

Dear My Question,

Your question: "I'm still trying to figure out why
so many faiths believe their God isn't "god" enough to save those who die
without being baptized/receiving rites in mortality?"

Answer: I
suppose most would agree with your premise that our all-powerful Father in
Heaven could abolish the need for baptism if he chose, but it was his Son who
said: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot
see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3) Rather than change the gospel and dilute
the need to "fulfill all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15)he instituted a way for us
to serve our forfathers by identifying them and then to "baptized for the dead"
as mentioned by Paul, but not understood by the so called Christian
Churches.(see 1 Corinthians 15:29)

Would you counsel God on how to
provide salvation for his Children? I like the fact that he is consistant in
the requirements to enter his presence but merciful enough to provide a way for
all.

I have a feeling the Pope will change this policy when he
realizes that the LDS Church sponsors the largest geneological library in the
world open to everyone's family research.

RE: I really don't understand

May 5, 2008 12:06 p.m.

It is because the Mormon church is walking in and saying that the deceased needs
saving bc they joined the wrong church.

How can you NOT find that
offensive? Especially if you were a holocaust victim who died for what they
believed?

I'm Not Surprised...

May 5, 2008 12:02 p.m.

the the comments above have been written - this is a Utah newspaper. LDS church
members are upset, not because of the geneology aspect as most mormons claim,
but because they cannot claim additional members after they die. If I didn't
want to be converted to the LDS religion - living in Utah - with all the
pressure and condemnation (yes, it's true .... pay attention to your youth and
what is said to their non-mormon friends), why oh why would I want to 'belong'
and 'baptised' after I'm dead. I believe that if I live my life as God has
shown us how to through his own son Jesus, I will be with him again when I die.
The promise of belonging to my own kingdom (oh, wait...I'm a woman) ok, so my
husbands kingdom where he is God of his own universe (or whatever), to any other
religion (except LDS) is absurd. And to the comment about the Catholic religion
being man-based? that's funny! really, really funny! especially if you say it
and belong to the LDS faith. If you want to 'baptise' someone, do it while they
are alive and leave the rest of us in peace.

I really don't understand

May 5, 2008 11:54 a.m.

Why are people complaining? Noone is saying that dead people are definitely
joining the church. The point is to give them the chance to accept or reject LDS
baptism. I would not be offended if a Muslim, Buddhist, Jew does something to
save me after I die. Then I would have all my bases covered.

To SammieB

May 5, 2008 11:51 a.m.

You wonder why Catholics don't want to hand over records when you freely throw
words around like "anti-mormon"? It comes down to religious records and
privacy. Hitler used those records to send people to their death. The
Catholics now simply refuse to allow that to happen again should catholic
genocide be decided as the next good thing. Ask yourself why it was so important
to baptize Adolf into your church?

Sad Catholic

May 5, 2008 11:48 a.m.

I'm Catholic in Salt Lake City and have spent countless hours in your library
pouring over the names of my relatives. I have nothing but good to say about
your genealogical recording system and the kind folks who operate it. It's sad
for me to think my own church is now going to stifle this resource that's
available to all and preferencial of none, with no strings attached. Today I'm
a sad Catholic.

Chance

May 5, 2008 11:46 a.m.

Protectionism is at the root of this conflict. It is unfair to the millions of
people around the world who genuinly need or want access to these records to
help them perform the research of their ancestors. I hope that the members of
the Catholic church recognize this for what it is and do a bit of complaining.
The Catholic church appropriated the killing of anyone who does not accept Jesus
as the Christ for many years during the crusades. During this time they
advocated the stealing of indigineous riches and sending it back to the pope (I
mean the King of Spain.) If they are willing to overlook the atrocities they
have committed in times past, why then can they justify this action? It is such
a small thing to them financially. Must be something else behind it.

Tia

May 5, 2008 11:46 a.m.

The difference is that the baby can grow up and leave if it wants. The deceased
has no say in the matter. It is not a vindictive move, it is one that is
attempting to protect its parishoners. They've had numerous complaints!

Mind you manners

May 5, 2008 11:43 a.m.

To "All of this assuming." To use your logic, the Lord should never have
performed the Atonement, or at least for 'select few' who would have received it
and Him.

Quit whinning!!!!

May 5, 2008 11:42 a.m.

The Catholic church DOES in fact own the parish records, their people kept them
up to date and have archived them. They have every right to do with them
whatever they want to do. It's not like they have burned them in some act of
defiance! And you don't "OWN" your ancestors, they were individuals NOT
property. Instead of complaining about the Catholic church's decision on this
site, why don't you look for ways to explain to the Catholic church both here
and in Rome the importance of the archives BEYOND temple ordinances??

Alex

May 5, 2008 11:43 a.m.

I don't see any reason why this issue can't be short lived. Hopefully, we'll
talk about it with the Catholic Church and get this resolved. If it isn't...oh
well. The records do belong to the Catholic Church and they can do with them as
they please. In that case, we'll have to go another route to get the
information. Regardless of what happens, we'll get the work done eventually
with or without the Catholic records.

If our determination to do
work for the dead is considered arrogant, then perhaps we should do a whole lot
more of it.

Why?

May 5, 2008 11:39 a.m.

I am so surprised by this move. It really does seem so vindictive and
territorial. I am not bothered that Catholics, Baptists, or others pray for my
soul. It just seems a little weird to me. I think Pres. Monson try to contact
the Pope.

Genealogy is important to people for more reasons than
just temple work. Some people jsut want to know about their ancestors.

SammieB

May 5, 2008 11:36 a.m.

Maybe this is the Lord's way of making us reach out to those of another faith to
get this work done. How many of us have done genealogy work and never said
anything to our family member's that are of another faith. The spirit of Elijah
is to also reach across those family lines and share the gospel. (All the
Anti-Mormons will pick that statement apart). I really think that those members
who are doing research and sharing with their families the chioce and the
meaning behind the ordinances will still have success. It is now time for us to
just bridge the gap in our families and ask for help from someone of another
faith with respect and humility, something that alot of LDS still need to learn.

Jason

May 5, 2008 11:35 a.m.

I suspect a coverup. Maybe some of the records reveal a medieval precedent for
the Catholic Priesthood's contemporary struggle with celibacy.

to ajarizona

May 5, 2008 11:29 a.m.

The nun did not need to find a priest for the baptism, since in cases of near
death ANYBODY is permitted to perform a baptism including a child, even self or
non-catholic. So I now am forced to doubt your story. Had the baby died without
benefit of baptism, God's grace would have been sufficient. Unbaptized aborted
fetuses are also expected to receive grace.

Confusion

May 5, 2008 11:28 a.m.

What is the difference in baptizing an infant in the Catholic church (the baby
has no choice in the matter) or baptizing someone who has passed on (and also
has no choice in this life)? To me it is the same since neither person had a
choice to whether or not they are baptized in that particular religion.

Tia

May 5, 2008 11:23 a.m.

I didn't have the time to read all of the comments, so I apologize if someone
has already mentioned this.

The church has in the past gone against
the direct wishes of a few religions and baptized holocaust survivors and so
forth which is incredibly disrespectful. People that have passed away belonging
to a certain religion should be respected, as they obviously believed in it.
When the dead are baptized it looks more like the LDS church is stepping in and
saying that the member was wrong and they have to save them. The Catholic church
is definitely not questioning their doctrines and beliefs, or saying the Mormons
could be right. That is simply arrogant. They just don't want anymore of their
congregations defiled. This is not just the Catholic church's doing, it is based
of of thousands of complaints from their faithful about the practice.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 11:19 a.m.

The most elitist, exclusive Church is not getting a taste of their own medicine!
How does THAT feel?!

Sign of the Times

May 5, 2008 11:16 a.m.

When the most important work on earth is thwarted, can the end be far away?

Those who know, shouldn't be saddened.

Those who aren't
saddened, don't know.

It will all work out according to the Lord's
plan. Have faith.

anon e. mouse

May 5, 2008 11:13 a.m.

ajarizona- Your story makes no sense. If the nuns wanted to baptize a dying baby
and there was no priest around, they would've done it themselves. After all,
they have access to Holy Water and I'm sure your mom wouldn't have.

Records

May 5, 2008 11:12 a.m.

The Church is not saying the records of your ancestors do not belong to you, but
that they don't belong to the LDS church.

joel

May 5, 2008 11:10 a.m.

This is broader than a purely religious issue. The LDS Church has the largest
genealogical research program in the world. For decades, it has copied records,
with the permission of the record owners, returned microfilm or digital copies
of the records to the owners and made the information available to the public
for genealogical research. Copies have also been safely stored in the Church's
granite vaults to preserve them against possible disasters worldwide. This has
become an invaluable source of genealogical records for researchers. By
choosing not to participate in this program, the Catholic Church is denying
genealogists worldwide the opportunity to research their ancestors. Forget
about religion or religious motivations for a minute; what kind of public
relations and human relations decision is this?

All of this is assuming

May 5, 2008 11:10 a.m.

Catholics and others are beneath the LDS and their teachings...that is what this
is really about. What gives any religion the right to say that? If you think
your religion is better than others then keep it to yourselfs and don't hurt
others with your arrogance. If you truly believe in "Baptisms for the Dead"
then do it for your own ancestors, but leave people alone with every bit as much
right as you to believe their religion is "true".

Bob

May 5, 2008 11:10 a.m.

Amazing. Why would the LDS people care if other churches started baptizing
their LDS dead? Their belief is that they have the proper priesthood authority
and no one else does. Baptize away! It'll be interesting in the next life,
won't it?

PCB

May 5, 2008 11:08 a.m.

It is just plain rude and arrogant to posthumously baptize the spirit or soul of
a person that spent their life BY CHOICE as a Catholic or any other mainstream
true christian religion believing in the holh trinity and the resurrection, into
a religion that couldn't be further out in left field from those core
fundamentals the person held dear. Are the LDS selective on who they baptize in
this ceremony. Have they baptized say Hitler or Jack the ripper or even Tupac
Shakur I wonder ?

Records

May 5, 2008 11:08 a.m.

The LDS did not consider my Catholic mother good enough while alive to see her
children marry in the temple, why is she good enough for them to care now that
she is dead? I read someone wrote that "they should accept it." Well, I was
the child that heard and saw the tears of my mother as my sister married. I am
glad the Church isn't giving out records. I am sure that though my mother
stated she didn't want any "mormon" work done on her, that it has been disobeyed
and my sisters did the work anyway. I thought the religion was about the
family, and I suppose it is...it's about tearing the family apart.

Cool!

May 5, 2008 11:03 a.m.

I was born at Holy Cross Hospital, too. I wonder if I was baptized. No one ever
told me. That would be fun to find out. I'm LDS by the way.

bhparkman

May 5, 2008 11:02 a.m.

How much are the Catholic's asking for the records? Don't tell me they're just
having religious differences over this - they want money or political
advantage.

Besides the Saints have much, much better archivial and
digitizing capabilities than the Catholic Church does. The records would be
safer and better preserved in LDS hands.

Temple V. records

May 5, 2008 11:02 a.m.

Support and accept what they have no control over are two very different things.
It's not the "will of the child" to exclude parents from a wedding but church
policy. Do you honestly believe one child wants his/her parents excluded? Sit
with the other in-laws instead of seeing the wedding in commradory. I ask you
now to accept that challenge. My mother did not dress my sister, but a
complete stranger. I know that my parents allowed the missionaries in their home
until they found out they were not allowed to see their two daughters marry.
The missionaries were never welcome in the home again and the church was
referred to as a cult. It is with the above in mind that many people SEE
the LDS church and one of the many reasons why the Catholic church does not hand
over records. Also of note, the LDS church is non-trinitarian and the Catholic
Church is trinitarian.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 11:00 a.m.

I wonder how Mormons would feel if the Catholic church started baptizing by
proxy all of you. Since you don't believe in it, would it bother you at all?
Catholics believe in One baptism therefore we don't need any others. If you
would claim the right to practice your religion as you see fit, you should give
others the same right.

Lets be neighborly about this

May 5, 2008 11:01 a.m.

From Luke 10:"..what shall I do to attain eternal life?""..love the
Lord thy God...and thy neighbor...""...who is my neighbor?""...a
certain man...fell among thieves, which stripped him...wounded him, and
departed, leaving him half dead.""...a certain priest...passed by on the
other side.""...a Levite...passed by on the other side.""But a
certain Samaritan...had compassion on him. And went to him and bound up his
wounds...and took care of him.""Go thou, and do likewise."

Perhaps

May 5, 2008 11:01 a.m.

We do consider the needs. The non-member parents of those married in the temple
can become members themselves, if they so choose. Then the point is moot. you
sound bitter. That's OK. My non-member father not only understood, but
RESPECTED the fact that we had chosen this path. He sat in the lobby of the
temple, waiting for us to come back. Then, he of course, did all he could to
make MY DAY more meaningful to ME.

If my child converted to
Catholic, would I be totall included by the priest in the ceremony? Not.

re: temple vs. records

May 5, 2008 11:00 a.m.

i have no need for a reality check- my point is that there are rules that the
LDS church wants respected, and people respect them (although i think it is
awful to deny a parent the right to watch their children get married). when the
tables turn, and the catholic church doesn't want their records open for
posthumous baptisms, then that too must also be respected, no matter how much
you want to howl about it.

LBR

May 5, 2008 10:51 a.m.

What I find interesting is that wen my brother was born in Holy Cross Hospital
in Salt Lake City in 1961, he was baptized in the nursery by the nuns. We are
not Catholic. Permission was not asked. I have no idea if this is still the
practice at Catholic hospitals or a fluk of the time or of the hospital.

I also think The Deseret News editors should cut off comments after 100.
The rantings get annoying. And who has time to read 400 comments?

ajarizona

May 5, 2008 10:51 a.m.

My mother trained with the Nuns at Holy Cross. She is LDS. One day an new born
baby was rushed to her by a Nun, they could not find a Priest to baptise this
baby. With fear and trembling, the Nun asked my Mother, a non Catholic, to
baptise this baby.

My mother went through the motions and the Nun
was relieved as my Mother sprinkled some water on the baby, soon after, the baby
died, and that Nun was at peace, for in her mind, that child would now, not go
to hell.

My Mother felt no need to lecture her about the wrongfulness
of infant baptism, which is her belief,rather, she respected the Nuns
religious viewpoint, and did what came instinctively to her.

Authority did not matter, in the Nuns mind, the baby would now be spared from
eternity in hell.

Disagree with my Religion if you will, but don't
tell me I cannot practice it.

ARROGANCE is, telling a Religion they
must not do this or that, or we will do this, to STOP you.

My
Catholic Ancestors belong to me, just as much, as the Pope feels they belong to
him.

LiveAndLetLive!

Penny

May 5, 2008 10:42 a.m.

Thank you, Lord, for making all my lines Protestant and primarily Scotch-Irish.

Have folks never heard of "free will"? Do they not believe that
those who've graduated from this life still have it? Do they not understand
that baptism is about far more important things than denominational
membership?

An LDS baptism was done for my oh-so-Southern-Baptist
maternal grandmother. I don't have any problem with that. It was offered to
her out of love and concern. If she was not inclined to accept it, I'm quite
sure she was/is capable of saying, "No, thank you. I've already been baptized."
Maybe a lot of Catholics don't think their ancestors are capable of saying,
"No, thanks."

Ownership

May 5, 2008 10:37 a.m.

The Catholic Church provided salvation to the people who were baptized into
their Church. The Catholic Church kept records of those souls who became members
of Christ through baptism by the authority of the Apostolic Succession that goes
back to Peter and to Christ himself. Those souls belong to the "Church" (i.e.,
body) of Christ, along with the records. No Mormon has ANY right to defame those
names or records by performing occult ceremonies in the false belief that it
gives the deceased the "choice" to leave the Catholic faith in the hereafter.
Even if those souls were your ancestors, that does not give you any claim on
their souls or their records. But the Church does have claim on their souls and
on their records.

Mona

May 5, 2008 10:35 a.m.

The Catholic Church performed a great service to mankind by keeping Christianity
alive through the centuries. They also took the responsibility of documenting
people's lives centuries before municipalities began to do so. And it seems
that if the Catholic Church now wants to restrict accessibility to those
records, they are missing the purpose of the great work that was done by the
priests of the past. How sad it would be if family researchers could no longer
have access to the only (in many cases) evidence of their ancestor's lives.

Temple versus records

May 5, 2008 10:33 a.m.

Those who proffer on here that somehow allowing Catholics into the temple to see
their child married is the same thing as looking at a record with information on
it need a huge reality check.

I understand your dilemma. My in-laws
are going to have to face that same situation in the coming years. I'm sure as
the time draws closer that they will become more interested in the church
doctrines and start to ask questions. Will they get baptized? Don't know. But
they do know that they will not be allowed into the temple as it stands now.

While some parents might be selfish and complain about the decision of
their child, it's nice to see mature parents accept the will of their child and
support him/her.

Doctrines are there to be changed on a whim because
some individual feels like they should be allowed into the temple. Life is full
of choices and we don't get to pick and choose the consequences.

These 2 issues are not even close to the same thing. So please stop showing
your ignorance and bitterness to something that will never change. You are the
one who must change. Get on with it!

Mohan

May 5, 2008 10:29 a.m.

I never realized that our Catholic friends haven't appreciated the service we
Mormons have been giving them and the rest of the world by photographing all
their family records for the world to access. This doesn't make any sense. I
think they are smart enough to figure out how they are hurting the world and
recant this rediculous stranglehold on public access. May God bless the
Catholic leadership to figure this out sooner than later.

It's a commandment

May 5, 2008 10:28 a.m.

For all of you who think the LDS Church made this up on their own, you are
sorely mistaken. It's a commandment from Christ and since it is a commandment,
we are obliged to fulfill the commandment.

It's actually pretty
simple....

Also, I'd like for a Catholic to explain to me how the
worshiping of Mary does not violate the 1st of the 10 Commandments. I've always
been puzzled about that one and haven't taken the time to ask a neighbor...

re: wow

May 5, 2008 10:26 a.m.

you're right, even as a non-practicing Catholic, reading these comments makes me
feel even more alienated by the LDS.

and lifer, you are right about
irony. i see, the LDS church wants these records, wants the Catholic church
information to remain open, yet and Catholic mother can't witness her converted
daughter get married. that's some real family values there- alienate your
non-LDS family- nice.

Pray for Pope

May 5, 2008 10:21 a.m.

Being the daughter of a Catholic convert I find this policy very disturbing. I
have a RIGHT to claim my ancestors records. I have always respected the fact
that I come from these other faithful pioneers- like Pres. Uchdorf spoke about.
I am even grateful that although I don't agree with infant baptism that
they have done that for without it & the records kept I would have many missing
children in my family lines. I hope that maybe we can all show our true
Christian nature and pray that the Pope's heart may be softened and that the
First Presidency may find a way to ease any concerns & get further permission to
access these records.

Marnie

May 5, 2008 10:10 a.m.

I am a Catholic who has done extensive genealogy research on my own family and
assisted friends in their searches. I have asked permission to view records of
many parishes (U.S., Canada, Ireland). Every one of those have asked me who I
was looking for (how related) and basic details of the person to verify that my
quest was personal and not professional. The Church is protecting against the
use of personal information in registers for financial profit. Parishes also
want to discourage people from browsing through frail registers; many pastors
responded to my letters by providing helpful information they had looked up in
the registers themselves, saving me time and travel expense, while ensuring that
registers were disturbed as little as possible.

You REALLY don't get it

May 5, 2008 10:07 a.m.

I understand that you're laboring under the impression that you have the only
true church and are doing a "loving" thing. But if the whole world is telling
you that you're doing arrogant and insulting things to which they specifically
object there may be a clue there that you're missing.

It's not that
anyone thinks your "baptism" invalidates or supercedes anything or is anything
more than superstition. It's that it insults the living and the dead in a
particularly in-your-face way.

If you don't care about being
arrogant, weird and irritating carry on. But there will be consequences so
don't bother whining about them when you encounter them. Or when your
missionaries have their jaws broken.

lifer

May 5, 2008 9:58 a.m.

The irony of Mormons getting upset over another church denying full access to
non-members is simply delicious.

FAMILY NAMES

May 5, 2008 9:56 a.m.

No one wants to "harvest names en masse" or disrespect "your" dead - we're
talking about people who have Catholic ancestors, who want to research their
family members, being singled out and excluded because of their religious
beliefs.

When I think of the millions of dollars and decades of time
the LDS Church has spent in collecting and preserving genealogical records of
every kind, only to turn around and share them FREE with the general public for
whatever purpose they may dream up - seances, family reunions, curiosity about
their ancestors - all I can think is, the Catholic Church must feel threatened.
It's too bad because it doesn't do much for its image.

Sure, the
church owns the books and can do what it likes about allowing some genealogists
to see them and excluding others. But maybe the leaders should think more about
this.

Catholic

May 5, 2008 9:42 a.m.

Parish records are the private property of the Catholic Church. They were never
meant for geneaology nor as a data base for Mormons to harvest names en masse to
disrespect our dead.

Thomas

May 5, 2008 9:42 a.m.

I just want to say that, as a mormon, I could care less if some other church
wants to perform proxy baptisms for my dead relatives... just as everyone has
been saying... why would I care since I do not believe in the authority of those
baptisms.

For those trying to 'turn the argument around' it doesn't
really work as I believe the majority of the LDS would not react the way you
seem to believe we would.

WOW!!!!

May 5, 2008 9:39 a.m.

I haven't read every comment on this blog, and I hope the Pope doesn't either.
All the Catholic bashing isn't going to help change his or anyone elses opinion
of the LDS church. In fact I have to wonder if all these negative comments
aren't doing as much damage between the two churches as the Pope's decision to
close the records.

Oh, really?

May 5, 2008 9:35 a.m.

"YOU HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OVER YOUR ANCESTORS!"

But the Catholic Church
does?

James

May 5, 2008 9:27 a.m.

How does that work exactly...do I live with my kids as a family forever, or do I
live with my parents as a family forever? Then what happens to my kids?If
people in heaven really have the choice to accept Mormonism or not (and the
proxy baptism) does that mean there's free agengy in heaven? How does that
work...how can Satan have influence in heaven? Plus, if God is standing over my
shoulder telling me to accept a certain religion, what choice do I have in the
hereafter? Why does a person need a physical baptism when all of us will
receive a perfectly good body when Jesus comes again? Why can't we just do it
then? God certainly knows who is good or not. If I were born in Mongolia in 400
A.D. and have no birth record, what happens then? Eternal damnation? If God
sorts out everything in the end, why even bother with proxy basptism in the
first place?

tstu

May 5, 2008 9:23 a.m.

Why wouldn't the Vatican just ask the LDS church presidency instead?

Ownership-

May 5, 2008 9:23 a.m.

I agree we don't own our ancestors. It isn't a matter of ownership. It's simply
a matter of finding out who our ancestors were and tying family lines together.
It's interesting information. The LDS church has no more Ownership of it's
members than the Catholic church does of it's members. Every soul that ever
lived on this earth has their own free will.

Isn't it highly
possible that sometime after the vital records were made hundreds of years
ago(birth, baptism, marriage) that the person may have chosen for themselves to
leave the Catholic church? There probably isn't any record made of that. So it
doesn't make sense that the Catholics have "ownership" over a person just
because their name was in the parish records. Perhaps if their death record is
in the parish and they were known to go to that same church their whole adult
lives, you could argue that they truely belonged to that church of their own
free will. ANd they can certainly reject the proxy baptism if they want to. I
would bet that many hundreds of thousands of people left church by the time they
died.

Once more...

May 5, 2008 9:17 a.m.

One more try...there is NO religous issue at stake here. Mormons believe in
baptizing the dead, no other church believes it has any significance. People
can believe what they want to.

The ISSUE HERE is that many of these
records will be lost forever, UNLESS an organization like the LDS church is
allowed to do what it has been doing for many years...microfilm the records.
These records will be lost or damaged unless it is done. For reasons peculiar
to them, the LDS people have taken on this task...let them continue to do it.
They turn no one away from their library or its immense store of records. Go to
the SL gnealogical library on any day...you'll see MANY non-LDS people there.
In fact, I think a slight majority of them are non-LDS (depending on the floor,
and day). Be reasonable...there is NO issue here for anybody to be upset about,
really. Religion is a matter of faith, not fact. We are all in the same boat
in that regard. The peculiar belief of one group is no threat to anyone else.
Microfilm these records, preserve them for future generations! I hope his
Holiness sees the light on this.

Rob

May 5, 2008 9:10 a.m.

Pres. Hinckley used to say "Things will work out". I think that applies to this
situation as well. We need not be judgmental of any group of people when the
fact is they really don't understand what we're trying to do. If this is the
work of the Lord, which I believe it to be, then things will work out. Let's be
kind, be better examples today than we were yesterday, and see what happens.

Prophecy

May 5, 2008 9:05 a.m.

This is merely a fulfillment of prophecy in my opinion. Family records should
not be ownership of any church. This is information that belongs to the people,
not to a given church, or sect. The LDS church has known this for years, and
have gone to great lengths to make this information available. The Catholic
church is apparently doing the opposite, and going to great lengths to make this
information unaccesable to the people. What a shame. What a terrible move by
the Catholic church. This is sure to upset more than just LDS folks.

Dutchman

May 5, 2008 9:02 a.m.

Now I know why the German, Elder Uchtdorf, was called as a member of the First
Presidency. It sounds like the the two Germans, President Uchtdorf and Pope
Benedict need to work this out. Also, I can't believe the number of issues the
very capable President Thomas S. Monson has had to deal with since becoming
President of the Church. God bless these noble men.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 8:56 a.m.

This is not about Mormons vs Catholics or what belief is the right one. People
from both sides actually need to learn to live and let live. It's really getting
old. My point here is those records should be public because they are the
people's not the Catholic Church's. The parishes were the ones in charge of
those record until beginning of the 20th century and those records should be
taken and administered by the goverment so the public have access to them. This
is like the times when the Bible was only read by the priests until the printer
was invented and then the public has access to it. The people is the right owner
of those records.

Franz

May 5, 2008 8:53 a.m.

To Cuts Both Ways: If the FLDS Church or anybody else wants to do baptisms or
any other ceremony for me after I'm dead then they are welcome to it. Proxy
baptisms have no effect on membership numbers, and is done as an act of love and
concern; if other churches care enough to try to save my soul at their
considerable expense then go right ahead. Again, there is no benefit to the LDS
Church from these baptisms, and there is a substantial expense to copy and
preserve the various birth , marriage, death and christening records. Building
temples, where these baptisms are done, are not cheap; this is in addition to
the infrastructure for family history research (libraries, computers, software).
The other churches should be ashamed that they don't care so much. Shame on the
Catholic Church for actually hindering this work. I have had respect for the
Catholic Church in the past, and still respect the members as good people; if I
were a member I would be embarrassed.

Michael

May 5, 2008 8:48 a.m.

Particularly for LDS members in Italy, this move will only aggravate the
horrible suspicion and discrimination they deal with. Regarding Catholic
objections to LDS baptisms for the dead, the Catholic Church historically has
done the SAME practice. They were called "indulgences," except their underlying
motives are far more iffy than those of enthusiastic LDS members giving of their
time to express something on behalf of their forbears. "Poor people, pay this
money and you'll get your ancestors out of purgatory (and we'll be able to build
St. Peter's.)"

ANNON

May 5, 2008 8:46 a.m.

Put your religion aside and look at it from a Non-Mormon's perspective, if
that's possible. It is considered and insult, and an a front to the, "affected
religion." Mormon's think they are God's gift to the world, when in reality
they are no better, nor worse than any other people. It is their perceived
feeling of superiority that is being condemned.

Mike

May 5, 2008 8:41 a.m.

It's not about the Church. The bottum line is, it's about families being
together forever in the eternities as a unit.

No Ownership

May 5, 2008 8:37 a.m.

The Churches have MUCH MORE OWNERSHIP over your ancestors than YOU do! People
identify themselves as a member of a Church and that identification holds more
power and weight than family ties -- that is why people leave their families in
order to be baptized into another Church. This is especially common for people
who join the Mormon Church. No other Church is so parasitic upon other Christian
Churches than the Mormons. They send their 50,000 missionaries out to create
dissatisfaction among Catholics by telling them a distorted story about a "Great
Apostasy". Then they rip people away from their families and away from their
Church to make them into Mormons. This is offensive enough. But then they want
to take these victims of indoctrination and use them as a foothold into the
Catholic records so they can do pagan baptisms for the dead. Just because you
have the same last name as someone else does not give you "ownership" over them
and their records. YOU HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OVER YOUR ANCESTORS!

Former Mormon

May 5, 2008 8:33 a.m.

I was raised in Utah and was Mormon, but converted to Catholicism in 2003. My
wife and children are still very active in the Mormon faith. Prior to my
conversion I served in numerous capacities including as a full time missionary,
member of a Bishopric, Sunday School President, as well as numerous other
callings. When I joined the Catholic Church I faced stiff opposition from my
local Bishop and Stake President. They visited my home many times and used
every rationale that they could think of to dissuade me. I found it
hypocritical that they would be so angry when the Mormon Church regularly
baptizes members of other faiths without providing a full doctrinal
understanding of the belief system. In order to become Catholic I had to attend
RCIA for a full year studying about doctrine and my obligations as a Catholic.
As a full time LDS missionary we would usually give three very basic memorized
discussions and then issue a Baptismal challenge at the end of the third
discussion. It was usually a pressure situation where "No" was not accepted as
an answer.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 8:25 a.m.

I think Catholics feel the same way we (LDS) would if we were being baptized
Catholic after we were dead?

Right On

May 5, 2008 8:19 a.m.

I think we LDS could certainly learn a lot from the Catholic Church. In the LDS
Church we NEED something like a HIPAA regulations to protect the privacy of
Church information. LDS Church members are the biggest gossips in the world!
Because they have a "lay" clergy, common members are called to callings that
give them access to private information about others. Ward clerks, Bishoprics,
auxiliary callings give access to information about other members' temple
worthiness, tithing donations (and therefore income), past Church disciplinary
actions, and more. And what do these people do with that information? They
GOSSIP! They judge one another harshly. They say things to their buddies in the
ward like, "Oh, Brother XYZ makes GOOD money! I have seen his tithing numbers!"
They tell their wives and their wives tell their buddies as they go walking in
the mornings: "Did you know the Joneses daughter is not getting married in the
temple! That figures. This is Brother Jones' second marriage. He was
excommunicated once."

If the LDS Church would take the privacy of
people's information MUCH more seriously, we would dramatically reduce the
GOSSIP in the Church!

Joyce

May 5, 2008 8:19 a.m.

It won't matter how many Catholic people get baptized by members of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints who are dead. God forces NO One. They
have the choice to accept that baptism or choose Not TO ACCEPT that baptism and
the same goes for the Jews who started the whole negative thing.There will
be so many that wish someone had been baptized for them. Sometimes it is their
own posterity who do the work for their dead.

The greatest gift our
Heavenly Father gave to all of us is the RIGHT TO CHOOSE!

They are my ancestors

May 5, 2008 8:18 a.m.

I have done genealogy since the mid 1970s and have found much information in
Catholic Church records in Germany. Most other parts of my family were
Protestants (Huguenots, etc.). The people who I looked for were MY ancestors.
They, according to our belief, can do whatever they wish with what is done for
them in our temples. If we're wrong it means nothing, has no effect on them,
and should not matter one bit to a person of another faith. Most of the my
family who I pulled Catholic records for were born 150-250 years ago, no one
alive knows anything about them, no privacy issue is violated, no harm is done.
Apart from what I may do with the information, many other people simply want to
know about their family tree and the Catholic records are excellent records for
that purpose. The amassed records of the LDS church are available to all,
stored safely for future generations and represent a treasure of immense worth
to everyone. It should be viewed as a way to preserve precious records to allow
them to be microfilmed and saved from fire, theft, or other harm.

Andrea Eaton

May 5, 2008 8:18 a.m.

Thank goodness King Henry VIII had the foresight to divorce England from the
Catholic Church and the Pope of his time, otherwise information on my whole
family would be lost by this latest edict. Oh I forgot, Henry wasn't thinking
about me or anyone else when he broke from the Catholic Church, he was thinking
about his lust for Ann Bolyn and his Catholic marriage to Catharine who he
really wanted to divorce (at least she kept her head, poor, poor Ann). Anyway
I'm grateful to Henry.

Paolo S.

May 5, 2008 8:03 a.m.

I joined the LDS church 17 years ago in Italy and after a month I started to
search for my ancestors. The city hall didnt have the records, the parish did.

Before approaching the parson I faithfully prayed I would not be
hindered in doing my research knowing that I was implementing one of the three
missions of our church. So I approached the parson and simply told him I was
beginning a family research on my ancestors. I then asked him kindly if it was
possible to look into the archives. He gave me a suspicious look to which I
sincerely responded I had no second intentions at all, and he could trust me. He
gave me the keys and asked me to lock myself in while I was doing my search and
promptly return the keys once I was done.

I spent four days in that
room, and for four days I had no problem in getting the keys: 1) because he
trusted me, 2) because the Lord was on my side.

Isnt this a Marvelous
Work and a Wonder? Would the Catholic Church be somehow able to stop it? I dont
think so... This work will continue!

Perhaps

May 5, 2008 8:03 a.m.

Perhaps if the LDS Church allowed Catholic parents to see their LDS children
marry, the distribution of records would not be an issue. Perhaps it is time
for the LDS Church to start considering the feelings of others over the needs of
self.

Truth

May 5, 2008 8:03 a.m.

They are CATHOLIC records and they can restrict them if they want.

Alex

May 5, 2008 7:53 a.m.

I'm completely scratching my head on this one. I've had enormous respect for
the Pope. I really do. I would hope that we can have a good conversation and
work this out. At the worst, we are useful idiots cataloging the worlds
genealogical records. At best, we are your friends assisting in helping the
dead who died without the Gospel to be able to receive the full blessings.

Incidentally, it wouldn't bother me one bit if any church did a ritual
for me in their church for my salvation. I'd be flattered.

To: On Limbo

May 5, 2008 7:51 a.m.

1. If Catholics believe they have the keys for some blessing the LDS do not
have, then they would be unloving if they did not share them, with whatever
stipulations they want to make, with the LDS and others.

2. The LDS
Church already shares all of it's births, deaths, and marriages for deceased
members with the whole world via familysearch.org. These records are in the IGI
there. If another church wants to perform ordinances for any of these people,
they just have to go there, collect the data, and have at it. I wouldn't care a
bit because, as a Latter-day Saint, I don't think they hold the keys or
authority. As for what the LDS dead might think having two sets of ordinances
performed for them (one by non-LDS proxy) -- they'll have to choose for
themselves. These people aren't really dead. They are not incompetent. They are
just elsewhere for the time being.

No second chance?

May 5, 2008 7:42 a.m.

So what happens to all the folks who lived and died without a knowledge of Jesus
Christ, people in the deepest jungles and outermost reaches of the world? Are
they just out of luck?

Another question if anyone knows the answer-
I can understand that the Catholic church "owns" the books or whatever the
records are written on, but do they "own" the information? Is it even legal to
withold this information from family members? Will they allow members of the
Catholic church access to those records? And what is there to stop a Catholic
who obtains the info from sharing with LDS families. (This is exactly the case
with a dear Catholic lady I know of who does lots of family research in LDS
family history centers. She is friendly with LDS and has no qualmes with sharing
her research with her LDS family and friends for the purpose of temple work.)

I think the Lord knew this glitch would come up and He'll provide a way
around it. I'm not thumbing my nose at the Pope. It just that this is the Lord's
work and He'll make it possible to continue.

To: No 2d Chance

May 5, 2008 7:26 a.m.

You said, "Scripture plainly teaches that if one waits until they have died,
they have waited too long. There are no second chances after death. This is why
it is a big deal."

I Peter chapters 3 & 4 tells how the Gospel is
preached to those who are dead. Christ came into the world (and also went to the
afterworld) to redeem the world, not to condemn it -- even the disobedient
spirits.

Would a loving God have created beings for the purpose of
damning them when they made mistakes or, worse yet, because they never have had
the chance to hear the Gospel. No loving human parent would do that to his
children. Why would one worship a god with such a character as you are
describing in your comment? The LDS teaching in controversy is only that baptism
must be performed on earth and by proxy for those who are dead. The Atonement of
Christ is a doctrine based on belief in the efficacy of a proxy offering.
Baptism for the dead is a proxy offering because, "They without us cannot be
saved."

Hey Vicki

May 5, 2008 7:21 a.m.

The family member can chose in the resurrection to convert and you don't need to
insult the families of the deceased by doing the temple work now. It's just
good manners. Remember though, if a person is a legitimate family member, the
Catholic Church will be happy to give you ancestry information.

Diana

May 5, 2008 7:00 a.m.

I live in Spain and work in a fHC here. We have a lot of Catholics come to the
centre to look for their ancestors, some cannot due to the fact that some
provinces are restricted by the Bishops in charge. LDS members have to write a
letter to the Bishop asking permission to view films. If the filming now in
progress here is cut off then many people are going to very sad, both Catholics
and LDS.

False on conversion

May 5, 2008 6:15 a.m.

To the person that Stated that the Catholic Church required rebaptism of all,
that is patently false. The LDS Church claims they are not trinitarian, while
other protestant churches claim they are trinitarian as well as the Catholic
Church. So, the Catholic Church accepts protestant baptism while rejecting the
non-trinitarian LDS baptism should come as a shock to no one.

Anonymous

May 5, 2008 6:13 a.m.

A lot of you talk of the records not being available to family for historical
purposes, lol. They still are, if you read the article it's available to true
family members.

doug

May 5, 2008 6:13 a.m.

My step-father was a good Catholic boy from Park City, who became a Mormon in
order to marry his first wife. Then she passed away. He married my mom, his
second wife, and became a Catholic again (though we were not). He wanted to get
back to his roots. He joined the Mormon church in order to get married to the
woman he loved. He did not join because Catholicism was wrong, he joined
because he was in love. Pretty common thing, actually. Tracks runs both
ways.

I enjoy these stories in this forum about how someone was a
Catholic and then became a Mormon. Well, I hate to tell you this but there are
conversions that did not take quite so well.

And my step-father used
to laugh about things that are taken a little too seriously here in this forum.
And, I really can't blame him. Lots of humor here about knowing what happens
after death.

Was it Mark Twain on his death bed that said: "Ah, now
for the great adventure."

Jim

May 5, 2008 6:12 a.m.

The Catholic Church doesn't have to give geneological data to anyone if they
don't want to. Think of it as Catholic HIPAA. The records are personal and
confidential unless those whose information is recorded and the organization
keeping the records both agree to release the information. Don't like it? Get
over it. You don't have a right to the information.

On Limbo

May 5, 2008 6:09 a.m.

While some Catholics might believe in Limbo, it was never Church Doctrine but
people doctrine...like the Adam/God Doctrine, blood atonement and other
teachings of the LDS Church.As the Jewish people were offended by temple
work for the dead, especially the Holocaust victims, why not wait until the
Resurrection and allow these people to make the choice for themselves? Based on
the size of past and present populations, we are not going to catch up as the
temple currently functions. It really would be similar for the Catholics to
approach the LDS Church to state that all LDS marriages are not valid and wish
to give the children produced legitimacy by marrying the parents after their
death into the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Would the LDS Church willingly hand
over records? My magic eight-ball says "not likely."

Vicki

May 5, 2008 5:51 a.m.

Is there not something called free will? If the deceased person wanted to be
Mormon, he/she would be. It's not for a "family" member to make that choice.
That is an abomination in my book.

"Holy" Father

May 5, 2008 5:46 a.m.

The pope can't pray for the world - because that includes me (a mormon). If I
wanted the pope to pray for the world (including me) then I would become a
catholic. By the way, how does the catholic church have ownership over my
ancestors? They are witholding info about my ancestors. . . talk about respect
for the dead (and living).

To: No 2d Chance

May 5, 2008 5:23 a.m.

My understanding is that the Catholics have believed that the living have the
opportunity to affect the amount of time that a deceased soul spends in
Purgatory. The time might be reduced through prayers (prayer candles) and
earlier there was sale of indulgences for the dead. This doctrine that the
living can change the outcome for the dead is a "similar" teaching held by the
the LDS church. Other similar teachings include Extreme Unction and LDS
annointing of the sick. Of all other Christian faiths, I would think that the
Catholics very well understand LDS ministrations in behalf of the dead. I think
it is in their understanding, not their misunderstanding that they abhor the LDS
practice. They understand the doctrines of authority and keys very well, and
have a very deep concern for the outcome of a deceased soul now having the
choice of which of the two churches to have membership in.

marvic ilagan

May 5, 2008 4:52 a.m.

julie is right. and i know baptism for the dead is a doctrine of God.

Sumiko Honda

May 5, 2008 4:46 a.m.

As a young Catholic, I don't think that the Vatican should engage in ecumenical
dialog with any other branch of Christianity except for the Greek Orthodox.
There are so many sects, groups, cults, and "churches" with traditions and views
so different from Catholic and also from each other, that it is pointless waste
of time. Regardless if the LDS is offended by this new Vatican ruling, it
was done to protect the private registry of members of Catholic parishes, and to
keep bizarre practices away from the Catholic Church.There is nothing
wrong with wanting to protect your own faithful (Catholics)

GBH Quote

May 5, 2008 4:26 a.m.

President Gordon B. Hinckley: "If there is trouble, let us face it calmly. Let
us overcome evil with good."

Dear Cuts Both Ways

May 5, 2008 3:49 a.m.

The LDS Church would not say one single thing about anothe Church doing baptism
for the dead and rebaptizing our members because they think we have fallen from
the truth. You apparently do not know the 11th article of faith where we allow
others to practice their religion and ask the same of them to let us allow our
religion.

I wonder if the catholic church believe in agency, the
great and wonderful gift from God to make our own decision. If we baptize them
and they don't wan that baptism then it is null and void.

Julie

May 5, 2008 12:58 a.m.

The main negative response to my earlier comment seems to stem from a
misunderstanding about the doctrine of baptism for the dead. Those for whom it
is performed have a choice of whether or not they want to accept this ordinance.
It is not revisionist history as claimed by one commentor because I believe the
records of who has been baptized for the dead are kept private in the church.
Mormons don't claim that anyone who has been baptized for the dead is now
"mormon." In response to other criticism, feel free to baptize me into any other
church or make me a member of any organization. I don't mind because I don't
believe it has any eternal effect or consequences.

lie in the bed that you've made

May 5, 2008 12:51 a.m.

"Still sane | 8:27 a.m. May 4, 2008So once again "Christians" fight
other "Christians" - oh, except the others don't believe that the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is Christian anyway. so, I guess it must be
OK."

Yes, it is okay. We are all free to believe as we will. We are
all responsible for our own faith and the doctrines that we choose to adhere to.
LDS believe that others are wrong, so why do they find it strange that others
believe that they are wrong? Please, let go of the persecution complex.

All Get Along

May 5, 2008 12:39 a.m.

This proves that religion is just one big fat source of contention in the world.
Let's bulldoze ALL the churches and put in parks. Everybody get out and get some
exercise and go be nice to your neighbors. Give your donations to an
organization that helps the poor, starving and sick not into maintaining real
estate. Then maybe you'll feel like getting off the prozac and find something
better to do than gossip and judge your neighbors.

no second chance

May 5, 2008 12:35 a.m.

"Julie | 12:48 a.m. May 4, 2008I'm still trying to figure out why it
bothers people that mormons do baptisms for the dead if non-mormons don't
believe that it has any effect."

"amen | 1:10 a.m. May 4,
2008I completely agree with Julie... If it is "erroneous" in their view,
then what is the big deal?"

Because it is 'erroneous', or, a false
doctrine. The same reason that we wouldn't worship another God, even though we
don't believe in other Gods. It would have no effect beyond dishonoring the
doctrine of worshiping Almighty God, and blaspheming. We know it to be a pagan
practice, therefore we want no part of it.Scripture plainly teaches that
if one waits until they have died, they have waited too long. There are no
second chances after death. This is why it is a big deal.

Alex

May 5, 2008 12:27 a.m.

Anonymous:

If LDS temple work is neither christian nor authorized,
then why would it matter? Heck, the genealogical records we record are
available to the public as a service. Yep, they are available to you too if you
wish. If I weren't a believing Latter-Day Saint, I would look at the LDS and
say, "Hey, go ahead and knock yourself out. It is no skin off my nose."

re: Anonymous 11:54

May 5, 2008 12:20 a.m.

"You folks who think the Catholic church is right, how would you feel if you
were trying to research your ancestors, (it would be almost impossible to
research without the Lds database.) and the LDS church said that you had to have
a temple recomend to view? I would be upset as a non-member. They are my
relatives."

Upset?...They are my relatives?

Hmmmm....I wonder if this is how a Catholic mother feels when she is denied
entrance to the temple to witness the marriage of a child who converted to
Mormonism?

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 11:58 p.m.

Temple work is not christian nor are these unauthorized baptisms. I think this
is only yhe first we have seen of this with other christian faiths following
suit.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 11:54 p.m.

You folks who think the Catholic church is right, how would you feel if you were
trying to research your ancestors, (it would be almost impossible to research
without the Lds database.) and the LDS church said that you had to have a temple
recomend to view? I would be upset as a non-member. They are my relatives. That
is exactly what the Catholic church is saying. The Lds church is doing everyone
a favor allowing ancestry research regardless of creed to search out ancestors
from the comfort of their own computers. If you don't do geneology then it
doesn't matter, however there are tons of people that do. I am not LDS but love
geneology and would hate to have to go to a foreign country if the Lds church
was doing that for free. I have found plenty of records off the database that
would have cost me thousands to fly to the countries and search the records. I
hope the Catholic church changes this bigoted policy.

Riley

May 4, 2008 11:53 p.m.

I was a catholic until age 21 when I converted to the LDS Church. I actually
have no problem at all with this pronouncement, and I still have much
geneological work to do. It will open up an honest dialogue on doctrinal truth
that, as evidenced by this move, has not been had in the past. It will foster a
better understanding of mutual beliefs and I'm confident that President Monson
will find a way to prevail upon the leaders of the great Catholic faith to allow
us (LDSs) to know our progenitors' histories. I am not worried and no one else
should be either. The end has only to be played out...all will have an
opportunity to accept or reject the restoration of the gospel. For my part, if
I've offended my Catholic brethren and family I'd love to sit down and explain
my motives, namely, to draw nearer to my predecessors thorugh temple work. I
also would like to apologize for the missionaries in Colorado who defaced your
monuments. I'm not sure if their actions had anything to do with the decision,
but if so, I offer my personal regrets. God Bless.

shawilli

May 4, 2008 11:50 p.m.

The parish records belong to the catholic church, they are theirs to do with as
they see fit, it is a prvillage NOT a right for the LDS Church to have access to
them.I hope that this policy may be changed in the future but, for the present
it is what it is and we must simply accept that. The work of the Temple goes on
and on even without access to Catholic parish records, we shall simply move into
another area of labor for those whose records are available to us. We shall have
enough temple work ahead of us to last through the Millenium, so rather than cry
foul lets move on and wait for the day when we can once again glean from the
parish records the information we need. I am sure that Heaveanly Father knows of
this matter and will deal with it in his own way and in his own due time.Shawilli

all hail the moderator

May 4, 2008 11:45 p.m.

I think that the posthumous baptism recordswill be used later to show how
many LDS members were there historically,

it seems like stealing
souls

Genealogist

May 4, 2008 11:44 p.m.

I have to repeat myself: you have still access to the archives of the catholic
church and this will never stop to happen! Nobody is asking you for your
religion when you enter a catholic archive. It`s now a bit harder for the
american genealogists and LDS Members, but there allready now a lot of records
not microfilmed by the LDS. Who has for example complained about the protestant
church in germany? They refuse to let their records filmed since the seventies,
because they think the LDS are not christian and a syncretic religion. Most
catholic Dioceses in Poland allready refused microfilming their records. The
pope is just going a step further after writing the essay about not accepting
the LDS Baptizm of living people (as a leader of the "Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith"). Take a deep breath and plan your next visit to europe
and the church archives here.

Rosie

May 4, 2008 11:44 p.m.

Neither my husband nor any of his family are LDS. They have been so grateful
that I have been doing pedigree research on their Catholic ancestors from
Louisiana, particularly after hurricane Katrina occured. They don't have the
time, or frankly, the interest to do it themselves. I will be sorry to tell them
that I may no longer be able to help them, due to this new policy of their
church. :-/

Ron

May 4, 2008 11:33 p.m.

As an active, practicing LDS member, I am ashamed and dismayed at this stream of
arrogant, prideful comments from other apparently LDS members.

How
quickly have you forgotten President Hinckley's many sermons to reach out in
love to good people in all faiths, and his acknowledgments that they also have
some of "The Truth." We may be troubled by this decision to withhold ancestral
records, but these rancorous attacks on the Catholic church, the Pope, etc. do
far more harm and are not Christlike.

It is this same chest-thumping,
boastful "we-will-crumble-you" arrogance that generates roadblocks in
approaching non-member friends who've experienced it, or which makes my
non-member friends and family regret their move to Utah. It is this same "holier
than thou" LDS attitude which I suspect at least exacerbated the anti-Mormon
feelings in pioneer Missouri, and which I know caused divisions in my own
family.

You may respectfully disagree with Catholic doctrine, but I
assure you that they do have some (as we view it) of the Truth , that they stand
with us on many issues of vital importance to the family and human dignity, and
that such negative comments cause more harm than you can imagine.

john b

May 4, 2008 11:31 p.m.

i would like to know sence my fathers family back at least 1756 were catholic
why i should not be able to get information on them for my own records not for
bapbtism just be cause i chose to join the LDS Church

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 11:30 p.m.

You'd think the Catholic church would be overjoyed that all of those children
they claim went to limbo because they died at birth without a baptism would now
have a chance to go to heavan. Oh well, that's apostasy for you.

Discrimination

May 4, 2008 11:30 p.m.

This is a crime against LDS beliefs.

If they don't believe it's true,
then it shouldn't be able to hurt them.

If they did believe it's
true, they would know that only those who accept the Gospel will have valid
ordinances.

If they claim we are doing something which is wrong they
would be wrong by the very bible they claim to believe upon.

"Else
what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all?
why are they then baptized for the dead?""if the dead rise not? let us eat
and drink; for to morrow we die.""But some man will say, How are the dead
raised up? and with what body do they come?"

The LDS church is the
only church on this Earth to even remotely resemble the teachings of the bible.

False accusers

May 4, 2008 11:27 p.m.

The LDS church has never claimed that baptizing on behalf of deceased ancestors
automatically makes that individual a member of the church. Never. That is a
false assumption by detractors who have only responded out of bitterness or
hatred, certainly not informed.

Phillips

May 4, 2008 11:15 p.m.

Thank you, Neola, for your comments. This work we do is awesome. We do this out
of love and to be of service to those who may want to accept it on the other
side the the veil (life beyond the grave). If one does not want this opportunity
they may reject it according to their choice. My son in law was Catholic until
his father invited the missionaries in. The entire family embraced the gospel
and are all members. They would want to give their family the opportunity to
enjoy blessing of being together with their family, not as angels flying about
but as real families, sealed together to be families as our Father in Heaven
(and Jesus Christ) intended. I pray that the Catholic church would not feel so
threatened as to close that information to anyone. The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints opens the Family History Libraries to anyone-'Mormon',
Catholic, Athiest....That is what God requires of us so we share rather than
keeping the information only within our membership. Let's just pray that they
would be forgiven for their mistrust and selfishness.

good doctrine

May 4, 2008 11:12 p.m.

Peter declared the gospel was taught to the dead. Paul said the dead were
baptized. Whats the problem? It seems to me the LDS are onto something.

Re: Dear Steve

May 4, 2008 11:11 p.m.

Returned Missionary

May 4, 2008 11:02 p.m.

Because of my mission for the LDS church, I had the opportunity to learn a
little about Catholicism. I hope all of you know that the Catholic church in my
opinion came closer to the truth than any other church besides the LDS faith.
Now I can sit here and argue about some of their doctrines such as infant
baptism, payed clergy, paying for your sins to be forgiven you and the doctrine
concerning life after death but I'm not going to. I'll I can truly say about
this situation is that the Pope is out of line. The LDS church and Catholic
church have been for a long time now, in good standing with each other and this
is an unnecessary decision on the Popes part. This would prove as further
evidence that the Catholic faith has started to believe in our "Baptisms for the
Dead." Otherwise, why are they so concerned about it. No matter what religion
you are you still need proper authority to do anything in the name of God. John
the Baptist had it , Moses had it, Abraham had it, Melchizedek had it, Adam had
it and all of us must have it.

baptism

May 4, 2008 11:02 p.m.

Odd how some people think the Catholics now recognize the legitimacy of Mormon
baptism. Former LDS members do frequently join the Catholic Church and must be
re-baptized. The Church has never recognized Mormon baptism, as it is without
authority. The Vatican just doesnt want you people using their parish records
for your illegitimate posthumous rites. Its really bizarre how most LDS here,
think they are entitled records that dont belong to them. The frustration of
this announcement must be too much.

Mohan

May 4, 2008 11:02 p.m.

This is amazing. Of course no Mormon would care if another Church wanted to
light a candle for their ancestors. We would think it is sweet. It certainly
wouldn't hurt us or offend us in any way. It would make me smile.

And for the Catholic Church to do this is like cutting off your own nose to
spite your face. All you do is keep people of all faiths from being able to
locate their family lines and fulfill the Spirit of Elijah. Mormons come in
free of charge and photograph millions of records at no cost to the Catholic
Church. Who else is going to do that? This will be short lived. Once they
realize they cannot do this work without us they will reverse their very strange
decision.

May God bless them to come to grips.

True Blue

May 4, 2008 11:00 p.m.

Funny how current research in Egypt is uncovering many documents that show early
Christians believed in, practiced and taught baptism for the dead.

Just the same as Peter talking about it in the New Testament.

This
is NOT NEW doctrine, it is surprising many non-LDS gospel researchers as they
uncover many old documents that support MANY of Joseph Smith's teachings.

Not only that, but NONE of the early Christian documents being found
teach contrary to Joseph's teachings!

The Gospel of Jesus Christ will
continue to be proven by research for those who desire to read it. But it is
only the power of the Book of Mormon that will convert you through the Holy
Ghost.

It matters not to anyone else if you believe it, It IS TRUE.
And you are the only one missing out on the teachings, ordinances and knowledge
by ignoring or fighting it.

Rich

May 4, 2008 10:56 p.m.

If the LDS church does not have the authority from God to perform baptisms for
the dead, these ordinances are of no effect and harm nobody. The Catholic
Church should look for ways to cooperate with LDS to preach the Gospel of Jesus
Christ rather than worry about LDS temple practices. There is a trend to
abandon all religion as well as the morality that comes with it. The Pope
surely realizes that Europe is becoming highly agnostic and atheistic, and the
U.S. is becoming more so. Some of my ancestors were Catholic, and I should have
the right to view the records of my ancestors. The LDS do not deny this right
to Catholics. Also, FLDS and RLDS members also can utilize LDS family history
resources for those who are wondering. The LDS feel that if somebody performs
an ordinance for a dead relative without God's authority, that ordinance is of
no effect.

Dear My Questions...

May 4, 2008 10:50 p.m.

If God was not "tied" by laws, then:

1. You would have no assurance
that God wouldn't decide to just do away with all of us for good. How long
could a god watch all our garbage and not just throw in the towel? After all,
he would be god, and have no obligation to us.

2. Why would God
witness the torture, beating and humilitation of His only Begotten Son if there
were some other option? The law had to be followed. We then, are indebted to
Him, our Father, and must obey His commandments, as He has said.

It
cannot be had both ways.

Just some observations.

Andy

May 4, 2008 10:49 p.m.

What a wonderful opportunity now for the average Latter Day Saint to become
better friends with the average Catholic. This way Latter Day Saints can help
Catholics with their search for their roots with the resources available to
Latter Day Saints & Catholics can help Latter Day Saints with the resources
available only to Catholics.

Re:Council at Nicaea |

May 4, 2008 10:34 p.m.

Pope Sylvester I sent two priests as his official legate representatives, Vitus
and Vicentius, who signed the canonical records of the Council. More than 300
Bishops attended, but just two priests with authority to act as emmissaries of
the Pope. Bishop Ossius of Cordoba is believed to have accompanied them to
preside over the council. You can read Ossius' biography--"Ossius of Cordoba by
Victor De Clercq.

cch

May 4, 2008 10:30 p.m.

Wow! What prideful and hateful comments. I'm LDS and I am embarrassed.
Comments with tones like these will only further convince the Catholic
leadership that they are doing the right thing. Way to go.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 10:27 p.m.

As a former catholic and a latin, I was sad to read about the Catholic church
refusal to provide these records. Americans and Europeans may have no problem
with that but for other regions such as Central and South America, Spain and
Italy, this is certainly a big deal. In Latin-America, it was the Catholic
Church the only entity who carried those records. In most countries, the
government started to take control of them since 1900 once goverments started to
separate the church from the state. It's so unfair and no right that they are
denying access to those records that are supposed to be public. Whatever I do
with that information is my business, not theirs. But I have faith that someday,
these records will be freed and we will have access to them. The work of the
Lord can't be stopped. In the meantime, put your shoulder to the wheel!!

What if she's my grandmother
too? Are you worried about my family being offended that you're saying Catholic
prayers for her? I doubt it. Somehow your being offended by our Mormonism is
supposed to command more respect than our desire to do something for her that we
think is important. That's hardly fair.

We're not infringing on
anyone's rights by researching our family and performing ordinances for them.
We have just as much claim on our ancestors as anyone else, Catholic or not.

And if Grandma doesn't want that baptism, she doesn't have to take
it. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Barbara

May 4, 2008 10:19 p.m.

Now is NOT the time to tear down each other's religion. We ALL believe in the
same God, we ALL believe in the same Jesus Christ. We ALL believe in the 10
commandments and we ALL read the same Bible. Let's just wait to see where this
ends up, and start acting a bit more Christ-like, Catholics and Mormons alike.

Linda

May 4, 2008 10:16 p.m.

My son's attitude is that he plans to be baptized in EVERY church "just in
case". I think it's a great idea, won't offend anyone and his "records" will be
worldwide.......

To: Happy

May 4, 2008 10:12 p.m.

I agree with your comment in respecting others, and I was annoyed by the woman
that stated the only time catholics are basically friendly is in a time of need.

There should be no need to worry about baptisms for the dead. What
is so upsetting to the catholics about these baptisms? Any religion could do
these baptisms if they wanted, but ultimately it will be the decision of the
deceased for what they want to choose.

Dear Steve

May 4, 2008 10:03 p.m.

Hey Steve, in case you can't read or comprehend, it is baptisms for the DEAD,
not the living. There is a huge difference...... what a silly and stupid
analogy....

It's people like you who don't have a clue and lack
understanding..... the people are DEAD!

Again, you want to baptize my
family that has passed on, let me know and I'll send you my PAF file of over
10,000 names....

Metonian...does the age of one's church make it a
true church? if so, can you show me where it states that? Do you know how to
read about the apostacy in the Bible?

Can you document the
priesthood line of authority from Peter to the current Pope? I'd love to see
it....Do Catholics really understand how their church came about? I think
not....

CougarKeith

May 4, 2008 9:55 p.m.

I would just like to thank the Vatican for finally acknowledging the
truthfulness of the Restored Gospel and the Priesthood Authority being restored
to the earth. It is a shame the Vatican thinks they can stop "God's Work" from
moving forward by withholding a few of their Geneology records. This should not
be surprizing as Satan has promised to raise his ugly head in opposition in
every way he can to prevent the work from moving forward. Relax, any "Stoppage"
this creates is only temporary, the work will be completed in the Millenium in
spite of any efforts to the contrary of True Doctrines of the Church of JESUS
CHRIST.

I think this is just really nice of the Pope and the Vatican
to finally be concerned enough to openly acknowledge the LDS Legitimate
Priesthood Authority, otherwise why would this even matter?

We must
remember the Catholic Church is a wonderful organization in today's day and age,
they are sincere and a wonderful people. They believe the doctrines and creeds
passed down from their fathers and councils.

They do a lot of Good,
They Help A Lot Of People, And We Must Remember The Sincerity Of Their Hearts!

Genealogy expert

May 4, 2008 9:56 p.m.

I passed along this information to a woman at church who has been working in
family history libraries for years. Her first reaction was not, "Shoot this is
going to slow the work down." But, "Well, there are going to be a lot of
Catholic people who will be very disappointed because they come to our LDS
Family History centers to find their ancestors. They can't afford a trip to
Italy or wherever to lok it up themselves. These Catholic (or Lutheran or
whatever) folks appreciate so much the effort of the LDS genealogy workers for
finding this information for them. So this is a sad event for LDS and Catholic
alike.

Baptism for the dead? I can see how Catholics would be
offended if they didn't understand it. If they knew and comprehended our belief
that this is just an opportunity we are offering to our ancestors, something
they may not have had access to in their lives on earth, and that they can
reject it if they want, it shouldn't be offensive to them at all.

I
sense that Catholics don't want to understand and are jumping on the bandwagon
of trying to squelch an opposing faith.

Belles N. Whistles

May 4, 2008 9:53 p.m.

I am not LDS so I definitely see little significance in by-proxy baptisms for
the dead, when I am dead.

However I do feel like I own my name and
identity, living or dead, and it is not the LDS's or a LDS's to assume at any
time. They say they do it as a gift of love. To me it is stil arrogant identity
theft.

The gift itself is just annoying junk mail addressed to my
soul. I am not Catholic either but I thank the Pope for his stand.

wrz

May 4, 2008 9:48 p.m.

>>The pope is scared and this is proof.

Re:Most Hon. Rev. Finkelstein

May 4, 2008 9:38 p.m.

"Wow! Look at all the LDS people who don't mind if some other church has them
baptized into another faith after they die."= This is because we understand the
"Doctrine" of "Free Agency", just because someone is "Baptized by Proxy" in a
temple who is dead is meaningless if: 1. The Church is not true. 2. The
individual chooses NOT to accept the Baptism in his/her behalf. 3. Authority to
Baptize is not From God and His Priesthood by the Laying on of Hands. With those
3 key principles baptize away my friend, I could care less after I am dead! Do
it, do all my dead ancestors, Truth is truth, and if the Catholic Church doesn't
believe in LDS Priesthood Authority what is the Harm in this? Are they worried?

Keith

May 4, 2008 9:33 p.m.

The catholic church is crumbling and the LDS chruch is growing and is seen as
the true church of the lord. I think this is a petty move and based on no truth
as the catholic faith has not had any truth nor represented Jesus Christ for
nearly 2000 years. The catholic church is insignificant and we are converting
members hands over fist. I think this is a childish and very very dark move by
a false church!

Carl

May 4, 2008 9:32 p.m.

I would say the Mormons have a little "face saving" to do with both the
Catholics and Jews.

re: Offended? Why?

May 4, 2008 9:31 p.m.

"No Catholic church member need feel offended - it's frankly none of his or her
business"

Beth, you should read up on the first few hundred years of that two thousand
years of history to which you are referring. "Clear" is not a word that
scholars would use to describe those times. Maybe you've heard of the "Dark
Ages" before? Hardly clear.

And nobody is trying to "trick" you
into anything at all. If you want to talk about "legitimate" Christian rites,
you need to start with the authority that Christ bestowed upon his apostles, not
"mainstream" status. Legitimacy stems from proper authority, not the
accumulation of history. But to each his/her own. I'll eat my apples and you
can drink your kool-aid.

Mertonian

May 4, 2008 9:25 p.m.

Hey, Upon this Rock (St. Peter) I will build my Church and the gates of hell
will not prevail. The Pope is like your prophet (without authority). Your church
is less then 200 years old, Ours is 2000 years old. If it be of God it will
continue if not it will die on the vine. Well, its still here and telling you
that have no authority....

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 9:24 p.m.

The mormons who have posted here are very prideful; so much to a point you are
an embarassment to anyone whom claims to follow in the footsteps of Jesus
Christ. I personally would say you are drunk with your percieved power and the
'authority' that you percieve god has granted you. I feel sorry for you all and
I wish that you could just repect fellow man without tearing down his faith just
to build yours up.

Steve

May 4, 2008 9:15 p.m.

I suppose if Catholic priests were running around hospital delivery wards
baptizing newly born infants Mormons would just simply watch in silence since
they don't believe it does anything...right?

Why should any church
leadership stand by and allow someone to perform what they believe to be a
heretical practice on their faithful?

Council at Nicea

May 4, 2008 9:14 p.m.

This whole council was a fraud perpetrated on people. When do you think the
plain and precious truths were removed?

You don't vote on whether or
not bap 4 the dead is a valid practice or not. You don't vote if God, Christ and
the Holy Ghost is one person or not. The definition that came of that council is
one of the silliest definitions ever heard.

Can't you people read the
Bible and see where there are 3 separate and distinct people?

For you
Catholic scholars....Who had the priesthood line of authority from Christ to
convene the Council of Nicea? Please document who it was that had the priesthood
authority, not the governmental authority, but actual priesthood authority!

I don't care what the Catholics do on their own time. The Pope is not a
prophet of God; he doesn't have any priesthood authority; he doesn't receive
revelation; where does it say that we should worship Mary...Actually the 1st
commandment of the 10 commandments tells us otherwise....

There are
so many fallacy practices in the Catholic Church it would take forever to list
them all.

Kostecki is a nitwit with nothing else to do but blast the
Mormons...

Zoar

May 4, 2008 9:08 p.m.

Aint no thang,

Since you are a former Catholic and Now LDS dont you
think you have the right to research the records of your own ancestors. If it
was for some Tom, Dick, or Harry, I would see their point. So all you people
that are making a big fuss, we are doing it for their own family not for
strangers. What is wrong with that? Are you going to tell me I dont have the
right to baptize dead relatives in my own blood line. Who is infringing on
rights now?

A couple of things

May 4, 2008 8:58 p.m.

First off, last poster Beth has no concept of Baptism for the Dead. According to
your logic, then the whole Bible is a myth...

To all you posters who
think that I would be offended if your church or any other church wanted to
baptize me or anyone else in my family after I was dead, I say, GO FOR IT! I
could care less and I'm sure that most Mormons would say the same thing. Knock
yourself out.

If the Catholic Church doesn't want its records used
for family history, so be it. All that means is that it will take a little
longer during the Millenium to sort out all the names. 1000 years is a long time
and people will be busy doing it.

As for doctrine, the Catholic
Church has changed so many things from the Bible that it scarcely looks like the
church that Christ set up while He lived on the earth. Anyone with have a brain
knows that they have no authority to do a thing.

I have too many
other things to worry about than if some Catholic is offended because someone
who died 500 years ago is baptized for the dead.

Offended? Why?

May 4, 2008 8:53 p.m.

What if I decide to take my Catholic grandmother's name to the temple and
receive proxy ordinances for her? She's my grandmother. If she disagrees with
what I do in the temple for her, that's between her and me, not anyone else. No
Catholic church member need feel offended - it's frankly none of his or her
business. There are former Catholics who join the LDS Church and want to
perform these ordinances for their ancestors, and that's their right. The
Catholic church making it more difficult by sequestering these records will only
make them look bad - and this being the Lord's work, it won't stop anyone for
long.

I agree that the Catholic Church's proposed action is about
money. I imagine anyone with enough money would be able to see those records,
regardless of what religion he is.

Re: Jen

May 4, 2008 8:52 p.m.

"The original Christian church, following Jesus Christ's death & prior to the
council of Nicea 3 centuries later, aka the Catholic church, practiced baptism
for their dead."

Did you learn this in seminary? You need to check
your facts. There were numerous break-off sects after the crucifixion. At
least one, even maybe a few practiced baptism for the dead, but it was
considered a LOCAL practice and was NEVER practiced as a whole by the mainstream
Church. The Council at Nicea sought to consolidate the beliefs of Christianity,
but baptism for the dead was never a practice of the "Original Christian Church"
or even a wide-spread practice and was considered heretical.

Beth

May 4, 2008 8:50 p.m.

Jen | 8:02 p.m.,

You have no proof that early Christians practiced
baptism for the dead as a legitimate Christian rite. two thousand years of
history shows that ALL mention of baptism for the dead in the Bible are
condemning that pagan, false, occult practice as evil and from the devil! Even
the Dead Sea Scrolls and the documents found in the Nag Hammadi Library all
clearly show baptism for the dead to be an heretical practice that was NEVER
mainstream in the Christian church.

"Dem apples" you so arrogantly
try to trick us into swallowing are poisoned apples! Poisoned by the lies of
Mormon apologist "scholars" who are on the payroll of your Church to give the
illusion of legitimacy and respectability to the false doctrines they are making
YOU swallow! Wake up before it is "everlastingly too late!"

A TRUE
sister in Christ.

fairytale

May 4, 2008 8:46 p.m.

The practice of trying to convert dead people is downright creepy. Not to
mention incredibly disrespectful, arrogant, and plain rude to the survivors.

Andrew

May 4, 2008 8:40 p.m.

I think Athiests have the only legitimate argument for being against the LDS
church baptising thier deceased anscestors because if they are correct then all
they have is the vestiges of their life including their name and may not want
that altered in any way. Other religions should be satisfied with the fact that
they don't believe it matters. So if the Athiest Society doesn't want to hand
over thier records then we should respect that;)

Ken

May 4, 2008 8:34 p.m.

The way I see it, the Catholic Church can look at the Mormon practice of proxy
baptism and 1) let them do it because in their mind it is a false and
meaningless effort, or 2) go one step further and withhold names altogether to
keep the LDS from even attempting it. They've decided to choose the latter.

I'm sure this isn't the end of the discussion and perhaps a
consensus can be reached.

Empty promises

May 4, 2008 8:33 p.m.

It's easy for Mormons to say they wouldn't mind if another religion baptized
them posthumously - since no other religion does it. How magnanimous is it when
there's nothing to lose? ... I'm also struck by the sense of entitlement Mormons
seem to have about another church's records.

Bruce

May 4, 2008 8:25 p.m.

The lords work will conitnue to be done. The idiocracy of the catholic church
will not stand in front of the lords true work. How come you think you are
loosing so many member! Because they aer becoming LDS and yes they will continue
to baptize former catholics because they want there ancestors to have the chance
in the after life rather than living in the eternal darkness of a corrupt
church!

Mary

May 4, 2008 8:17 p.m.

I have a question. If I now go to a Catholic church to see my ancestor's
records, am I going to have to swear under penalty of perjury that I am not LDS?
and if I lie, can I march myself right over to the Catholic confessional, with
records in hand, and promise to never do it again? How are the Catholics going
to know who is LDS and who is not? Is this a witch-hunt? I am not looking for
my ancestors to do their work, I am looking for my ancestors to know where I
came from and who else I am related to. I'm looking for my family.

just a thought

May 4, 2008 8:16 p.m.

The mission of the LDS church is to preach the gospel; period. We don't care if
not everyone will join; that is not the point. The point is that everyone has
the opportunity to hear the gospel. That is what the members of the church have
been commanded to do and we are trying to do it in a spirit of love. Other
organizations can't stop the work from progressing. Joseph Smith said, "The
Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from
progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble,
calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and
independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept
every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be
accomplished and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done (History of the
Church, 4:540).

Misguided

May 4, 2008 8:17 p.m.

The pope is unguided and at the helm of a false church. I would suspect we will
see more of this as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints continues to
grow in stature. These little knee biters will try to take away from the church
because of the authority we know has been bestowed upon us. I think the pope may
be jealous that a twenty year old boy has more authority then himself.

observer

May 4, 2008 8:10 p.m.

I haven't read all the posts but what right does the pope have to tell their
congregation what they should do with their own personal records. As far as I
know the FHC abides by all laws governing privacy rights. No church has
exclusive rights to all these records and is not the spokesperson for any
family. This issue should be in the hands of the individual families about what
information they feel should be disclosed. If the pope had said to use caution,
I can accept that, but he didn't. Sounds like interference in personal lives of
individuals.

Jane

May 4, 2008 8:06 p.m.

To Jordon,

How dare you accuse the Catholics of "standing in the way
of the Lord's work".

The Catholic Church IS the Lord's work! They
have been doing the Lord's work for ten times longer than you Mormons have been
deceiving people with your lies about the so-called "apostasy"!

You
make me sick and angry toward the arrogant Mormons!

judie

May 4, 2008 8:03 p.m.

When I went to the LDS Library, no one asked me what my religion was. They
kindly helped me find my French and Spanish and other ancestry. They were quite
kind to me. I found lots of my ancestors and found that they came from places
that I never knew existed and so I found a new part of me.

Jen

May 4, 2008 8:02 p.m.

To Mark, Jason, Decider of Dominator, DCC, etc. you may want to go back and
check the facts on Catholic history. The original Christian church, following
Jesus Christ's death & prior to the council of Nicea 3 centuries later, aka the
Catholic church, practiced baptism for their dead! The practice was only
removed like so many other doctrines when Constantine & the others had their
council. How do you like 'dem apples?

Boo Hoo

May 4, 2008 8:01 p.m.

I can not wait until I here a statement from the first presidency. I think the
catholics are ignorant and selfish for this but it will solidfy how much of a
threat we are to bringing down the false doctrine of the catholic church and how
jealous they are that we are converting nearly all there members.

Leslie Townsend

May 4, 2008 7:59 p.m.

The Catholic Church should be ASHAMED for being so supremely ungrateful for the
fantastic genealogical database the LDS Church has compiled and allows EVERYONE
regardless of religion to use. Why should the LDS Church's proxy baptisms both
them unless they believe it would actually have some sort of permanent effect on
the souls of the dearly departed Catholics in question? It is pure insecurity!

re: "my questions"

May 4, 2008 7:53 p.m.

To answer an earlier question: Why isn't God powerful enough to save without
baptism/ordinances? He is. Joseph Smith taught (you can find this in the
Doctrine and Covenants) that children under the age of 8 are saved through the
blood of Christ because they are without guilt. The rest of us, however, are not
without guilt. There are certain stipulations to entering in the Kingdom of God,
just as there are certain stipulations to earning a scholarly degree. One has
to work toward it and complete certain requirements. Baptisms for the dead show
the mercy of God. How would you like to not be able to earn your degree because
you didn't know about certain classes that you had to take to graduate? By the
same token, how would you like to not be able to go to Heaven because you didn't
know about baptism (think about the millions of people who died without a
knowledge of God or Christ)? Baptisms for the dead give people the opportunity
to "take the classes necessary to graduate" before their final desination is
determined.

get a clue

May 4, 2008 7:52 p.m.

Why does the LDS Church require non-mormon polling workers to obey the
word of wisdom while using their church buildings on election day?

Its simple. Because the LDS subscribe to this belief as part of their
theology, and they demand that it be respected in their buildings. They forbid
all polling workers to drink coffee or use tobacco products in the building out
of respect for Mormon beliefs.

You people do not get it. The
Catholics DO NOT BELIEVE in baptizing the dead. I dont care how much support
you think 1Cor 15:29 gives you, Christian churches are very clear in their
beliefs that Mormons misinterpreted Paul, and several posters here have outlined
that for you. The Vatican has addressed this and will not contribute to an
erroneous ritual that does not coincide with Catholic theology. Catholics
obviously want the same respect for their beliefs when asking for parish
records; that the LDS demand for Mormon beliefs when their facilities are being
used as polling places.

You guys need to stop bashing the Catholics,
and making arrogant and judgmental comments. Youre no better than the
Anti-Mormons who bash you on a regular basis on these boards.

Jordon

May 4, 2008 7:40 p.m.

The catholics should be ashamed of themselves standing in the way of the lords
work. I now know that they are horrible and misserable people if they cannot
grant this choice on to those who have believed a false gospel and have gone
before them and live in the darkness of non-existence.

No Name Catholic

May 4, 2008 7:34 p.m.

this is BIG. this is HUGE!

first the Mormons tried to do baptisms for
the Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust, without regard for how the Jewish
community and synagogues felt about it. this is EXTREMELY insensitive and
disrespectful. but the mormons DON"T CARE about anyone but themselves.

now the Catholic Church has finally realized what disrespect the Mormons have
been performing against their people!

all you Mormons can do is whine
about it. it never occurs to you that what you are doing is GROSSLY offensive to
others. you don't care.

well, it is about time. thats all i can say.
its about time.

FAITH

May 4, 2008 7:32 p.m.

HEADLINE: "Catholics told not to give LDS parish data"Thank God!

Wouldn't be bothered

May 4, 2008 7:31 p.m.

No, actually, I wouldn't be bothered if some other faith did baptisms for the
dead for my ancestors, even the LDS ones. As I don't accept their baptisms as
having any effect whatsoever, why would it matter?

The Catholic
church must believe our baptisms are valid, and also that a person can be
baptized against their will. I think what we have here is a fundamental
difference in beliefs about baptism.

To all the LDS members who claim this practice is "no big deal" and doesn't
really mean anything, why is the church spending so much time on it? But more
important, what sort of records are kept on individuals from other religions who
have been baptized LDS? Surely some notation for perpetuity is made which
associates the individual as having been baptized? Is THAT a secret??

And to those LDS who say they really wouldn't mind being baptized into
another religion because it "doesn't mean anything," do you understand that some
future relative or geneology researcher might come to the conclusion that you
were Catholic, Hindu, Protestant...what goes around. Thanks to Pope
Benedict for protecting these PRIVATE records.

Richard

May 4, 2008 7:24 p.m.

I think for the good of genealogical research covering the entire world, the LDS
church and the Catholic church should come to a mutual agreement that benefits
both institutions. Sure there are religious differences, but these can be put
aside for a common genealogical effort that is underway around the world (there
are a large number of non-mormons doing this now). Catholics can continue to
access free genealogical data put into organized data bases, and LDS can do
their baptisms for the dead. Both win under this scenario. Wow, maybe nothing
should change.

Vaiola

May 4, 2008 7:11 p.m.

The comments have been very interesting...some very negative and incredulous
toward the Pope. What most of you don't understand is that he doesn't
understand...at all. The publicity engendered by his decision will open all
kinds of doors for the missionaries...by people who want to know the truth and
can see the dichotomy you all have commented on. Just keep serving your
neighbor and doing good to those who may offend you. Remember, "No unhallowed
hand..."

Tigerlily

May 4, 2008 7:10 p.m.

to non mormon. we as lds people have every right to search out our ancestors no
matter what religion they may be. and us as relatives have every right to the
information about our ancestors. and yes we do have the right to speak for them.

Freeman

May 4, 2008 7:06 p.m.

To The Shadow:

The information needed for family history databases is
not the same as church membership records. You say the LDS church would not be
willing to give up info to the Church of the Magic Wand. Yet, the LDS church
has already made all of that and more available online to everyone, including
the Magic Wand people. Nice try, but in the end you have shown that...

The Shadow Knows Nothing.

anonymous

May 4, 2008 7:01 p.m.

OK, now get this......any church in the world, ANY, can feel free to baptise my
dead ancestors. It doesn't bother me at all because I know that they do not
have the authority to do so. If the Catholic church believes that the LDS
Church does not have the authority to do baptism's for the dead then what's the
concern. Obviosly the LDS Church is a major threat to Catholism.

Money

May 4, 2008 6:59 p.m.

These posts are silly. The obvious truth is the Catholic chuch wants money for
its records and that's it. They have seen how the world in anxious to find their
ancestors, it's just not an LDS thing, and they want to cash in, pure and
simple. But have fun thinking this is a religous issue. Its all about money.

William F. Butler

May 4, 2008 6:58 p.m.

I'm glad to see the Catholic Church has finally recognized the authority and
efficacy of the LDS Church's ordinances -- why else would they worry about
Mormons peforming baptisms for the dead?

I personally would be
pleased if a Catholic felt concerned enough about my salvation that they would
light andles and say prayers in my behalf. I would be pleased and appreciative
but would not think for a momnt that there would be one iota of difference as I
do not think they have the power and authority to act in God's name.

Nevertheless, I respect Catholic clergy and members for the good they do
throughout the world and hope that we cn have mutual respect and dialogue in
spite of this rather narrow-minded move on their part.

happy

May 4, 2008 6:56 p.m.

I think if the Mormons want to be respected than they too must respect others.
If you know that this offends maybe it would be kind and Christ-like not to do
it??!! I am a Catholic - and I believe the Mormon Church has not holds on anyone
- we believe in one baptism, no need for another. I believe that God has the
final say - not you or I - let's all try to focus on that and things should flow
smoother. Just a quick ? - early post said that when a disaster strikes
the LDS church is called upon to help everyone - why then in published photos of
some disaster areas there are boxes with "LDS ONLY" stamped on them?

Mahershalalhashbaz

May 4, 2008 6:56 p.m.

To sjc 9:44am : Actually the Catholic church used to accept baptism from other
"Christian" religions except for the Mormon church. Under the new pope, a
statement was made that the Catholic baptism is the only baptism that will bring
a person salvation. It ticked off a lot of protestants. Do a search on google
and I believe you will find the AP article about it (not that I take the AP to
be doctrine of the Catholic church). Anyone else have any info on this?

Larry in Ohio

May 4, 2008 6:56 p.m.

I am not catholic, but I do respect the Pope very much. There seems to be a lot
of LDS envy concerning the Pope in these posts. Could it be his popularity?

Mrs. Gecko

May 4, 2008 6:55 p.m.

Boy, the Catholic Church must be scared! They don't even recognize LDS baptisms
anyway! I was graduated from a Catholic high school, having been raised by an
Irish Catholic mother who was a genealogist back in the 60's. She often
complained that the priests all over America and Europe were a major roadblock
to her work and she even resorted to bribing them with money to get the records
she needed. Obviously she just did the work for history's sake and was upset
when I was baptized Mormon, but finally accepted that I was doing vicarious
baptisms for all the hundreds of family names because she believed lt "it would
be for naught". Now, that she is deceased and I did her temple work I bet she's
really grateful! (Satan may have won this battle, but we know who will win the
war!)

silly

May 4, 2008 6:52 p.m.

It doesn't cut both ways as was posted above. Any mormon could care less if the
FLDS or any other religious group decided to proxy baptism in their temple. The
point is that it's a *proxy* baptism, not a cursing. The person who the baptism
is for gets to decide for themselves if they want it. If someone of another
religion decided to baptize for the dead and offered a proxy baptism for my
ancestors, I'd care less because it wouldn't mean anything. As was said many
times above - if you believe the other churches are wrong, then the baptism
wouldn't mean a thing. Obviously, the Catholics must believe that the LDS have
the priesthood or the restored gospel if they care so much about the LDS
offering baptisms for the dead. Else, why would they care at all?

P. Roxey

May 4, 2008 6:50 p.m.

If the LDS practice of baptisms for the dead is not valid in the eyes of the Man
Upstairs, then it's just a bunch of misled nimrods wasting their time.

If it's valid, then it must be important.

But either way,
what's the harm in trying to tie the human family together?

I can see it now

May 4, 2008 6:47 p.m.

The Catholic Church requesting of the mormon church all marital records since
mormon marriages are invalid as determined by the Catholic Church. The Catholic
Church, in loving kindness, only wishes to legitimize the offspring.

ToSetefano&LDS

May 4, 2008 6:47 p.m.

Folks, the last thing I want is to sound preachy. That said, it would be good
to carefully gauge what is said about our beliefs in the Church on these posts.
It is important to be steadfast and bold in one's testimony, but remember that
the Saints were kicked out of Missouri for a reason. It was the pride they had
among themselves as well as the pride in their beliefs. Pride in their beliefs
was manifest by wearing the truthfulness of the gospel on their cufflinks to
people of other faiths and essentially condemning them at the same time.

I would hope to be thoughtful as I address others in forums like this
and consider how President Monson would address such a topic.

What
about baptism for the dead? The Lord will work things out for the best if we do
our part and try to be diligent in living Christ-like lives, just as He always
has.

A little more study...

May 4, 2008 6:43 p.m.

There are definitely a lot, many, non-scholars of the bible. I amazed at some of
the simple minded statements and shallow arguments. Its becoming very apparent
to me that most "christians" have no idea what the bible teaches. They created a
life philosophy over a few scriptures and passages but have not taken the bible
in its fulness. Ironically, without a complete knowledge of the Holy Bible they
are trying to lecture the LDS faith on what they believe. An absolute
demonstration of arrogancy.

Susan C.

May 4, 2008 6:43 p.m.

I am not Mormom. If I want to be a Mormom, I can get baptized while I'm alive.
Anyone baptizes me after I die, I'm coming back to complain.

Jed M.
says the Catholics have no authority to speak for the dead; well, the Mormom
church doesn't either.

Anon

May 4, 2008 6:37 p.m.

Did any one think that this is the reason why the prophets over the past many
years have asked us to step up the temple and family history work - they saw
this coming and I am sure there is more to come that will hamper the lords work
for a season.

Not about Mormons

May 4, 2008 6:30 p.m.

This edict from the Vatican is NOT about the LDS church. Look at what the pope
has been doing. He's returning the Catholic Church back to its traditions.
Vatican II nearly destroyed the church. He is trying to give it an identity
again, rather than following the whims of the world.This is just one more
such step. He's saying, "We are not LDS. We are of the Catholic tradition. We
have tried too hard to be like everyone else. It is time to take a stand."Some LDS are so full of themselves that they think this is an attack on
Mormonism. It is not.Now, the good news...the parishes seldom listen to
Rome!

PROOF!! against them

May 4, 2008 6:19 p.m.

"except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God"

I read this on an earlier post. What an IRONY!!

Say that the LDS church for sure is the only true faith of the one true
God. If that was the case then the Catholic church is hindering millions and
millions and only doing more to hurt people. Their history is full of this and
they STILL WILL NOT CHANGE. What an evil thing.

So rather than
POSSIBLY hurting millions, you think they wouldn't want to take the chance.

God didn't create man to hide the truth from him and give visions to a
few and then stop.

God is an unchanging God. He does not give Moses a
vision and centuries apart give others visions. and more and more...then
suddenly stop. After reading the Book of Mormon there is no denying that it is
solid. It is truth. Joseph wasn't asking to fight everyone. He was chased down
and stripped of freedom as the prophets of old.

Are people so dumb
that they believe that reading the book will kill them?

Those who
seek truth find it.

James 1:5

Lynda T

May 4, 2008 6:09 p.m.

If a baptism is done for anyone after they are deceased, the baptism will only
take effect if the deceased person chooses to accept it. No one is forced into
anything.

If the roles were reversed...

May 4, 2008 6:04 p.m.

I honestly wouldn't care. I'm actively LDS and would have absolutely no problem
if some other group out there decided to have baptisms done for me or my family
after we're dead. I don't feel threatened by other groups. And even though I
disagree with it, I have attended a number of baby baptisms because I love and
support their families. The baby isn't harmed. :o)

I do hope that
this policy is changed, as it does present serious problems for many people --
LDS and non-LDS -- in trying to research their family histories.

Reader

May 4, 2008 6:01 p.m.

Ah yes, the Catholic Church covering all it's bases. Can't lose any more members
after this life can they? Wonder why they're so concerned since they don't
believe it anyway. Or maybe they do believe but won't admit it.

vaase

May 4, 2008 5:59 p.m.

Peace be unto you my brothers and sisters! Let not your hearts be
troubled or be attacked. Surely I am so surprised at the good shepard's
proclamtion on the matter[not!].

I will surely bring forth
this matter to the attention of the cardinals, and his highness for a round of
discussions at our next meeting of very sound minds, for no one [un-hallowed
hands]can siop the work of the Almighty. For the work of saving souls shall
go forth.

Until then...Hail Mary full of grace unto thee!!!

tlpick

May 4, 2008 6:00 p.m.

Mark no one has baptized Martin Luther. He is still Luthern. No one would
re-write your history. If one of your desendents becomes LDS and choose to
baptise you when you have passed on you have the right to choose that ordance or
not. No one forces it on you.

here's my 2 cents

May 4, 2008 5:57 p.m.

So many LDS church members are saying here that they wouldn't mind having work
for them done in other churches after they have passed on. I'm curious to know
how they would feel if the Catholic church started re-baptizing people like
Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and the rest...and then the Pope came out with an
official declaration saying that God told him that these people have accepted
the work and would now be referred to as "Catholic." I don't think it would go
over so well.

Also, what kind of cruel and uncaring god is it that
the Mormons believe in...the kind who would damn his children to hell for not
having had the chance to learn about the LDS church? That's what they're saying
when they tell you that the temple ordinances are necessary for the dead.

tlpick

May 4, 2008 5:56 p.m.

Orin you simply don't understand what the LDS church does with records it gets
from Catholic parishes. It takes one tracing their family line to be able to do
any temple work for them. I nor anyone else cannot just take an entire parish
record and do a baptism for the dead. The person you are doing it for also has
to accept it. I personally would care if any Church wanted to take the LDS
Church records and perfrom ceremonies for us that way I just might receive
double the blessings.

Who is next?

May 4, 2008 5:55 p.m.

First the Jewish faith and now the Catholics. I think the LDS church is on the
short end of the stick with this practice.`

to "Mom" & "DeseretratinNC" ....

May 4, 2008 5:53 p.m.

...and other petty critics; if you don't want to discuss this subject, show some
manners and just move on. The rest of us DO want to discuss it.

Talisyn

May 4, 2008 5:51 p.m.

the funniest comment i read was someone asking if the LDS church would mind if
people took the records of those in polygamous marriages in the past went and
divorced them all. honestly, the church doesn't ask what people do with the
records they get in family history centers. it's conceivable that other churches
are performing their own sacred ordinances with the names. i don't think the LDS
church really cares. i know i don't. in fact, i would love to hear that my
great-great-great-great uncle horace was baptized in the church of the hairless
bunny last week. people are too touchy about religion. just relax, grab an
ice-cold drink of whatever, and trust that God has a sense of humor.

flaggram

May 4, 2008 5:47 p.m.

I was born in a Catholic hospital in Pennsylvania. At that time their practice
was to baptize all children born in case they died before receiving that
ordinance. Therefore, I was probably baptized a Catholic before I was baptized
at 8 years of age. It means nothing to me that I was baptized a Catholic.
There was no authority or proper method. So do I worry about it...no!!
Therefore the Catholics should not worry about LDS baptisms for the dead if they
don't think there is any meaning in it. Let it rest and allow people who want
to search out their ancestors do their thing.

Re:Robert

May 4, 2008 5:40 p.m.

If you can't see the difference between praying for someone, and baptizing them
without their permission, then you don't understand much at all.

re: Non Mormon

May 4, 2008 5:38 p.m.

Your childish metaphors don't apply. You're performing rituals for people who
are dead and can't answer for themselves. You're taking on the right of deciding
for them. You assume that your religion is the only true religion, that the
religion they chose is meaningless. And you rationalize that by saying that
you're giving them a chance at your one true religion. Now that is the
definition of arrogance. But then, that's what happens when people come from a
small, closed minded society, when they're told what to do, what to think.

Re: russ

May 4, 2008 5:32 p.m.

Nice straw man russ. It was especially useful for talking down to the others on
this board. I especially like how you try to make it sound as though we believe
in a higher being that is somehow different from your God - as though you and
your God are a little too "big" for us.

Anyway, here's the bigger
picture - the LDS believe that performing proxy baptisms is a commandment from
God. You don't believe that and that's fine. You don't see anyone here
ridiculing you for that. But we believe that commandments from God aren't
"silly" or "small" as you've tried to paint our beliefs. I'm sure it didn't seem
right to Abraham that he should sacrifice Isaac but he tried to anyway because
it was a commandment from God. I'm sure we don't fully understand all of the
reasons why we need to perform proxy baptisms or keep records here on earth, but
we do it because we believe it is a commandment from God. Pretty simple

Jeremy

May 4, 2008 5:33 p.m.

How sad are these little little kneebiter catholics and 'christians' as they
attack the church through this post. We are authorized from god and I am sorry
if you do not wish to believe but still the same we are authorized for this
ordinance and furthermore hold up the one true church on this earth today. Thank
you folks for you comments but gods work will carry on through the one true
church on this earth and no naysayers nor false or corrupt religions will
dictate how we do that.

Bocephus

May 4, 2008 5:28 p.m.

The Catholic Church said no......you mormons can't have their records. Sorry.
All of your whining and tantrums won't change a thing. The records belong to the
Catholic Church, not to the LDS church. Do whatever you want with your own
records, but leave others alone. Simple enough for ya?

Don

May 4, 2008 5:24 p.m.

Here we go again. Someone of another faith with the lack of knowledge to our
faith and assuming the worst. That is called fear of the unknown. If they would
truly try and understand the extent of what those records can be used for then
there wouldn't be a problem. Knowledge is power, and obviously they are
powerless, and look who they are hurting, not themselves, their own
perishioners.

Shelley

May 4, 2008 5:23 p.m.

Hey, I've got a compromise.

Not so very many years ago, the Jews were
offended to discover that some Holocaust victims had been given proxy baptisms.
Out of respect for the history and feelings of those of another faith, the LDS
Church no longer allows its members to perform proxy baptisms for Jews unless
the member involved can show family ties to the ancestor being proxied.

That way, we are showing consideration for the opinions and emotions of our
friends of another faith, but the rights of people to provide what they see as a
service to their beloved ancestors is also not being smothered. Why not do the
same thing for the Catholics, if they feel offended by the ordinance of proxy
baptism for the dead?

What?

May 4, 2008 5:17 p.m.

Someone above referred to God as "He or She"? Please read St John 15:18-21. If
you don't know who God is, then what are you worshipping?

Just Curious

May 4, 2008 5:13 p.m.

What does the Mormon Church believe is the purpose baptism? I never thought
about it until reading all these posts.

Ain't no thang

May 4, 2008 5:10 p.m.

I'm LDS, converted from Catholicism 8 years ago. This doesn't bother me or
offend me at all. We should respect the wishes of the Catholic Church. To me it
is akin to obeying the laws of the land.

The plan of salvation, most
specifically salvation for the dead, is what helped seal the deal of my
conversion. I realized that if Jesus Christ and his Gospel truly is the way to
salvation (John 14:6), then everyone would have to do the same exact things to
be saved. And with the same ordinances being done for everyone, then all mankind
will get the same exact chance to accept or reject it. That told me that God is
completely fair.

If indeed the LDS Church is the true church, and our
doctrine is true, then God will not leave people hanging just because access to
their records was denied. He will work out things fairly in the end. Let's trust
in Him and move on.

it's rude

May 4, 2008 5:07 p.m.

It's rude and shows a lack of respect for people of other faiths to baptise
their dead. Even though I don't believe it will do anything because I don't
believe in anything LDS. I do find very offensive that a group would try to
undermine a person who has made their choice about their god and their faith.
You may think you are doing good but I find it offensive. Sorry that is just
what I think and I think you should get the family's permission before doing
anything with their dead loved ones.

I don't get it.....

May 4, 2008 5:03 p.m.

If the intent of the Catholic church is to prevent Mormon temple stuff from
happening, then they are essentially saying the Mormon rituals have an impact on
the dead. Are they saying the Mormon rituals make dead Catholics into dead
Mormons? Sounds like fear is the culprit. Do whatever religious rite you want
with my name when I'm dead. I believe Christ will be the judge so whether the
Catholics, Mormons, Muslims, Buddists, or whatever faith does something with my
name, I don't believe Christ will condemn me for anything they do. If Christ
requires one of the religions to do something for me so I can be in heaven, then
great, hopefully one of them is right and the things the others do won't negate
what the one right one does. Ignorance breeds fear & hate.

re: Rob | 4:34 p.m.

May 4, 2008 5:02 p.m.

What are you talking about sinister plots? Thats bizarre. Did you even read the
article? The Vatican clearly said why it did not want to deseminate the
data:

due to the confidentiality of the faithful and as not to
cooperate with the erroneous practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints.

The Vatican does not want the confidentiality of any
living members breached. Additionally, they believe like all other Christian
churches that the practice of baptism for the dead is wrong and heretical, and
the Catholics do not want to condone something that contradicts their beliefs.
The LDS Church will not get the Vatican to back down on their statement...its
clearly based in their theology.

PJ

May 4, 2008 5:02 p.m.

To Truth Sayers fans

No, you're wrong again, you are now only
removing all doubt as to whether or not you have any cognitive abilities. We get
it, you don't.

Fundamentalist's of any faith don't subscribe to
baptisms for the dead. This is unique to Mormons.

Again, John 3:5,
1st Corinthians 15:29.Available for all to see in every Christian
bible.

Look, when you still think Revelations was the last book
written in the Bible, then there is not even a starting point with one, so
ignorant.

And to all who want the genealogical records for ancestry
and ordinances performed, they are available on the Ancestral file and IGA,
already.Again, moot points of concern.

The Catholic ban is only
for Mormons. If they do allow public access in the USA, it must be for all or
none. The US constitution assures us of that.

If anybody for any
reason wants to perform a ritual for my soul, then have at it.

Your knowledge of the doctrine of baptisms for the dead is very
weak. You obviously aren't aware it was taught and practices in early
christendom and that the Bible supports it.

God certainly is
omnipotent, etc. but that doesn't mean he is going to snap his fingers and we
are going to turn into good smart people. Even God is subject to certain rules.
For example, omnipotent means God can do anything right? Well then can he make
a rock bigger and heavier than he can lift?

Robert

May 4, 2008 4:57 p.m.

As an devout Latter-day Saint, I hold no ill feeling towards the pope and still
respect him for the stand that he has made. He has made a decree for what he
feels is the protection of those who trust him to protect the sanctity of the
flock.

It was an honest act upon his part in good faith. The pope
has made many such proclamations that talk about defending what he believes to
be right.

Let us hope that he can see our efforts to make our
records available to all people. It is our hope that others will feel like we
are friendly and open to all walks of life to access records for the benefit of
their families.

I do make this plea, what benefit do we get out of
doing this work for others if our work is for naught? Isnt that the same as
priests going and praying over the dead? Even if we claim that ours is the true
authority....do they not also do the same?

Let us pray to work
together. I work to respect others faith, I hope others respect mine.

Great Point, Russ

May 4, 2008 4:51 p.m.

The focus on the trivial trivializes the power of God. As though God spends all
day keeping track of who was baptized by proxy...

russ

May 4, 2008 4:40 p.m.

I know this might sound... well... small... but if God is God, then wouldn't be
kind of silly to think that God needs us to write out a list of anything, or
baptize for the dead, etc. Wouldn't just a single prayer, group shot as it may
be, cover everything?

My God is the master of the universe. I don't
know the size of yours. Mine is omnipotent. Omnipresent. The beginning and
the end. He or She does not need us, we need him. When one believes that we
have a mission to do things and without that being done, God's will will be
thwarted ... is to prove that our God is too small.

Get a bigger God.
Relax about the baptisms for the dead. Good grief.

Rob

May 4, 2008 4:36 p.m.

As to people thinking its disrespectful to perform proxy ordinances of
baptism, well that is understandable to. It's just because they don't
understand the doctrine and they have been told things about the work that
simply aren't true. For example, in high school my sister dated a guy that was
not LDS. He asked her, "what's this dipping for the dead that your church does?
Do you really baptize dead people?" Once she explained that we don't baptise
dead people, what baptisms for the dead were, and why we do them he didn't have
any more problem with it. Maybe this will all lead eventually to more openness
and sharing of historical materials, and other churches will build their own
geneological libraries that will be shared with the public.

Shadow

May 4, 2008 4:34 p.m.

Let me try to get through all of this with a scenario. Let's pretend that the
Mormon faithful and their authorities are asked by the Christian Church of the
Magic Wand to turn over their membership records, living and dead, so that the
Christian Church of the Magic Wand, can do some ceremonies in which the little
fingers of the dead turn into magic wands and that that will please God
according to the Christian Church of the Magic Wand.

Would Mormon
authorities cooperate?

And that is why the Roman Catholic Church has
said no. It is about time.

Note: I am not a Catholic but I
certainly understand where they are coming from on this. Let's have a little
respect for the dead... and for a Christian Church of more than a thousand
years.

The Shadow Knows

Rob

May 4, 2008 4:34 p.m.

We live in a digital age. It means there are new kinds of dangers. It's
understandable if the Catholic or Jewish leaders think the LDS church has secret
plans to use all this data they are collecting on people and families to do
something other than what they say they are doing, which is performing proxy
ordinances. I'm sure there are some people who think the LDS church's
explanation for why they do geneology is just to hide some more sinister plot.
The LDS church knows well the threats of someone else writing their history.
But the solution is not for every church to shut their doors and try to keep
people away from historical materials, but rather to create their own databases
similar to the LDS churches vast geneological records so they can keep the LDS
church or any other entity that they think may be a threat to them in check.

Surprised

May 4, 2008 4:31 p.m.

In answer to a number of commenters who wonder if an LDS member would be
offended if the Catholic Church or FLDS decided to do ordinances or rituals for
my deceased ancestors, the answer is no. I am not offended, but rather
appreciative of their friendship when my Catholic friends have lit candles for
my deceased mother-in-law. I simply refuse to let Catholic Church's position on
this destroy the wonderful friendships I have with numerous Catholics. Though I
am confused at the logic of Catholic Church's position, as an LDS member, I
refuse to take offense at it. Hopefully, someday, sooner rather than later,
there will be more of a meeting of minds between Catholics and Mormons on this
issue.

Clark

May 4, 2008 4:22 p.m.

First the FLDS fiasco and now this. I certainly say the LDS church has an uphill
battle in establishing legitimacy as a respectable faith.

To the Rev:

May 4, 2008 4:08 p.m.

You can proxy-baptize me into your church - doesn't mean I'm going to accept it,
though.

response to Truth Sayer

May 4, 2008 4:07 p.m.

Good post!to "pj" who responded to it....spoken like a true
fundamentalist. Bet I can guess your church affiliation.

G Jiles

May 4, 2008 4:04 p.m.

It is now official the LDS church and its practices are not christian. The Pope
has spoken and so let this pass.

Rex

May 4, 2008 4:03 p.m.

I have no problem with any church performing any ordinance for my deceased LDS
ancestors or Brigham Young. It is showing respect not disrespect. It shows love
for their eternal souls. Free agency is a gift and God. Nothing is forced on
anyone.

Matter

May 4, 2008 3:56 p.m.

Is it not a matter of: I wouldn't mind if someone baptized me into their church
but a matter of WOULD the LDS Church hand over your records to the Catholic,
Lutheran, Muslim or of course the Church of Satan in order for the baptism (or
other ordinances) of those contained within those records.

Most Hon. Rev. Finkelstein

May 4, 2008 3:54 p.m.

Wow! Look at all the LDS people who don't mind if some other church has them
baptized into another faith after they die.

Why wait? Line up!
Let's do it now!

Plain and Simple

May 4, 2008 3:49 p.m.

I find it amazing that so may LDS people in this thread just don't get it. But
then when you come from the point of view that only you are right, that only you
do God's work, that only your religion is the true religion, I can see how that
would happen. Here's how it is. Other religions use genealogical records to find
out about family history. The LDS church uses them to get information to do
baptisms for the dead, which is an insult to people who are not LDS and believe
in their own faith. These are Catholic records. They have the right to withhold
them from anyone they so choose, including the LDS church. LDS people are
accustomed to having their own way in the small state of Utah. Please don't try
to impose yourselves on the rest of the world.

Genealogist

May 4, 2008 3:48 p.m.

Most of the catholic records from germany have allready a "No circulation to
family history centers in Europe." sign. As a german genealogist i`m used to
this restrictions. It`s not a question of doctrines, it`s a question of money.
It`s more expensive to visit a catholic archive than ordering microfilms in a
"Family History Center". In my opinion theyre also afraid about the new
digitalization project of the church and the possible loss of "customers" in
their archives. But the letter from rome does not mean for us that they`re
closing their doors, you just have to visit their archives in the future and the
work for our ancestors will move forward.

Karl

May 4, 2008 3:46 p.m.

In many cases Catholic parish registers do not exclusively belong to the
Catholic church. In many countries Catholic priests are paid by the government
and one of their duties is to keep track of names and dates - birth, marriage,
death, for the public record. Anyone is entitled to that information.

Howard

May 4, 2008 3:42 p.m.

The Catholics DO baptise the dead--I drove by their cemetery and noticed they
had their sprinklers on.

Membership/ records

May 4, 2008 3:41 p.m.

Perhaps the Catholics should start their own genealogy society and charge for
memberships just like ANCESTRY.COM , who as well have accesses to many world
genealogy records. Will the Catholics cut them off as well? I certainly hope
not, because I love Ancestry.com.

Bill

May 4, 2008 3:32 p.m.

The LDS church needs to learn respect for other religions. Until they do, they
won't be respected.

I agree with you to a poing

May 4, 2008 3:34 p.m.

Marilyn. But that is not all the LDS are doing with the names. People have the
right to object to the fact that they "baptize them" after death.

re;Matt Connelly

May 4, 2008 3:32 p.m.

"This action from the Vatican is completely out of line."

What an
arrogant statement. The Catholic church as well as the Mormon church have the
right to set policy with regard to their own records. The arrogance and
impudence with which you speak makes it clear why many people are offend by
Mormons who think that they are so clearly "right", that it's never necessary to
consider the views of others before opening a mouth and inserting a foot.

??

May 4, 2008 3:30 p.m.

John 3:5 - Jesus answered, Verily verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born
of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

What happens to those who die without Catholic baptism? What happens to those
that died in ancient China or Africa that have never even heard of Jesus Christ?
What happens to those that died long before Jesus was even born?

For
this reason alone, baptism for the dead is the most merciful doctrine and the
only thing that makes sense. On one hand we know that baptism is required. On
the other hand, there are so MANY that never even had a chance. This is
just one of the very important reasons why the restored Gospel is the only
Christian doctrine on the earth that makes sense.

Not to Worry

May 4, 2008 3:29 p.m.

There is no need for worry. God is able to do his work, in spite of the efforts
of man to stop it. This work shall progress forward, and the names of the dead
will become available. The church has barely made a dent in the overall work
that needs to be accomplished. When the Savior comes again, during the
Millennium, this work will move forth unencumbered.

So in the mean
time, we as latter day saints, should love our fellowman, and trust in the
Savior, whose work this is.

As the Prophet Joseph so eloquently
stated, "No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may
rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth
of God will go forth boldly, nobly and independent, till it has penetrated every
continent; visited every clime, swept every country and sounded in every ear;
till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the great Jehovah shall say
the work is done." (HC 4:540)

Catholic genealogists?

May 4, 2008 3:25 p.m.

You mean, no one who uses the Church's Family History Library, or any of its
satellite Family History Centers around the world, is Catholic? What do
Catholic genealogists have to say about this? Will they appreciate their own
church muddying their genealogical waters? I'd be leaving my parish immediately
if they made it hard for me to look up my ancestors.

I'm LDS, and
if any other denomination took up this cause and started microfilming and
preserving these records to the extent that the Church has, for any reason -
including baptizing them Catholic, Baptist, Jehovah's Witness - I'd say, let
them go for it. Since their practices carry no weight or authority (to me),
who's it going to hurt? In the meantime, valuable records are being saved for
those who are interested in family history. I'd be grateful, not acting
bratty.

The Popes, Saints, and Mother Theresa all have the same
choices in the hereafter that my ancestors have: accept the temple ordinances,
or not. It's no affront to their beliefs to offer the ordinances to these
people - as someone else said, it's an act of love. What are these Catholic
church leaders afraid of?

Matteo85

May 4, 2008 3:23 p.m.

I respect the Pope's decision to do what he did, regardless of how mis-guided I
feel it to be personally. Authority and "acceptablility" discussions aside, the
Lord's Work will not be hampered by anyone or anything. If the Catholic Church
is correct in its doctrines, then its sacraments will have power over the souls
of men in the next life. The same applies to the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints; if the Lord's Hand is in His Work, then His Hand will
prevail, no matter what the Pope or the Prophet might do to the contrary.

Common' It's Simple

May 4, 2008 3:20 p.m.

Somone asked earlier if the Mormon Church would do for other religions what the
Catholic Church is refusing to do for us. The answer is NO. We would not
knowingly give our member records to other Churches for the purpose of doing
their work for our dead. It's simple. Stop being hypocritical.

Agreed.

May 4, 2008 3:07 p.m.

The LDS church baptizing people are they are dead is arrogant. They are saying
that the life these people lived were not good enough, and their life wasn't
complete because they werne't LDS. Let people rest in peace. And yes, people can
rest in peace if they are not LDS.

whatever

May 4, 2008 3:07 p.m.

The posts that claim that other churches are suddenly nervous or worried
therefore proving the Mormon church is right, are funny. It never ceases to
amaze how flexible the Mormon argument is.

I think it has only been
recently (esp. with the Internet) that other churches have discovered what
Mormons do in their temples. While it was known that Mormons researched their
ancestry, nobody really understood that they were out to baptize the world, dead
or alive.

As a Mormon I find these comments from the Vatican not only extremely offensive,
but also extremely uneccesary. Where is the spirit of love and understanding
here? Words like "erroneous" and "detrimental practice" are not loving words but
divisive and arrogant words. Didn't the Pope just come to America proclaiming
the need for human love and tolerance of those who may believe differently? I
find the highest degree of hipocrisy in this letter. Besides, let's get a couple
things straight. First, Mormons are major geneaology buffs. Not all work they do
is intended for post-humous baptism. Second, even if the records are used for
post-humous baptisms, why does the Catholic Church care? Is this harming anyone?
Is this disrespecting anyone? The answer, of course, is none of the above. Let
me be clear. This action from the Vatican is completely out of line. Their words
and actions go contrary to the spirit of love encouraged by Jesus Christ. They
owe the Mormon Church and its members an apology.

F

May 4, 2008 3:00 p.m.

Some of the comments are extremely disrespectful to the Catholic church. They do
have the right to keep their records confidential. As would the Mormon church if
they chose to do so. As earlier comments suggested, it's true, baptisms for the
dead don't bother some people. But they bother a lot of other people who believe
it's disrespectful to baptize them to a church they were not affiliated with,
nor wanted to be affiliated with. Like most of you who are very devout in your
faith, some of these people that are chosen to be baptized were also very devout
in whatever faith they chose. It's almost like the LDS church is saying the
faith they chose when alive wasn't acceptable, but now they can rest easy. The
Catholic church has a right to keep their files confidential. If people chose
not to be baptized to the LDS church when they were alive, there is a very high
chance, they and their familes, wouldn't appreciate you baptizing them now. Just
like I'm sure many of you who are LDS would not want to be baptized a Catholic
when you are deceased.

Hannahsrock1

May 4, 2008 2:57 p.m.

As an LDS member, this is one of those times when I simply say "If you don't
believe in proxy ordinations, then why should you care if we do them?" If it's
a matter of protecting parrish privacy that's one thing but if it's a matter of
not sharing information which, in large part, is public anyway, that is
another.

This will strain relations between the two churches for sure
and the LDS church will gather the information it seeks another way.

re: Non Mormon

May 4, 2008 2:56 p.m.

Yes, you are trying to speak for the dead. You are the one being arrogant here.
Let's speak metaphorically. Imagine death is a big desert. nobody wants to go
there but it's inevitable. everybody ends up in the desert either able to
progress to a desirable destination or to suffer. But in order to progress they
need food. We are placing food at the edge of the desert (we can't go into the
desert without suffering death). They can take the food and move on or not.
It's their choice. But the food has mushrooms and you find that offensive
(because mushrooms are vile). So you are trying to compel us to not put the
food out because it is disrespectful to those in the desert. The desert people
are completely unaffected by our mushroom laden food unless they take it, but
you don't even want to afford them the opportunity one way or another. We at
least provide them a choice. You do not. It is you who is arrogant.

Kim Greenland

May 4, 2008 2:50 p.m.

The work for the the ancestors is a great work. It has to be done now or later.
When the Mormon church only amounted 1 million members after the II ww they went
to the European countries and got permission to microfilm the churchbooks. In
return the countries received a copy. At that time the Mormon Church was a
curiosum.When the Church now as a visible actor in religion seeks
permission with the big religions there is an opposition. They must be nerveous
in one way or another to condone the principle. Even it is a principle for
concern for those who have lived without beeing ex. baptized in the past.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 2:49 p.m.

I'm LDS and if some other group wanted to rebaptize me after I am dead (Church
of Satan or FLDS or whoever), go ahead, it won't mean anything. Only baptism by
the proper authority has meaning. So the argument that the LDS would get mad if
someone else were doing the same to us is invalid.

Alan

May 4, 2008 2:45 p.m.

Being LDS, I don't agree with the Catholic church's position on this matter.
However, LDS people need to be careful before being offended at this action.
LDS baptism for the dead basically says that baptisms performed by other faiths
are less than valid. That's taught specifically by the LDS church, based on the
concept that one must have authority given by God to act in His name. Perhaps
the Catholic leadership feels that giving names to LDS people undermines the
weight of Catholic baptism. (In the LDS Church, we have policy and tradition
that makes sure nothing takes the place of or replaces a temple marriage, for
the same reason.)

If we react angrily towards the Catholic church,
then is baptism for the dead in temples really the gift of love we claim it is?
We, like those we believe are waiting for work to be done on their behalf, may
need to exercise patience, faith, hope and tolerance.

re: yes or no

May 4, 2008 2:22 p.m.

I think you know the answer. The Church would not want to knowingly assist the
efforts of a cult to baptize LDS members.

I wonder if all these
people who say they wouldnt mind if another church baptized them posthumously
would feel the same way if the Catholic Church made it a practice to send
priests to the deathbeds of LDS people to perform baptismal rites without
consent, as an expression of love and faith.

DRJ

May 4, 2008 2:17 p.m.

So what...who cares? There are a lot more important things in the world to worry
about right now than who's baptizing whom. Religion is all faith based. No one
from any religion can show absolute irrefutable proof that any one religion is
the "true church of god." It's all about what each person believes. As long as
you're comfortable with what you believe, then so be it. Just don't try to force
your beliefs on others who are not interested.

zzman

May 4, 2008 2:13 p.m.

Use the records for family history/geneological research and stop insulting the
dead. The Mormon Church oversteps on this one. Stop insulting people by
performing Mormon ordinances and respect the dead--be they Jews, Protestants,
Catholics or whatever. It's pretty simple! Seems that a few Mormon posters
above understand how insulting this is.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 1:59 p.m.

what gives the mormon church the right to do anything with these records other
than to make them available for genealogy. the catholic church is well within
their right do say and do what they want with their records. it is an invasion
of privacy. i was raised catholic then became a mormon. their marriages are
for time only. maybe they don't want the prospect of an eternal marriage. that
is their right. how would mormons feel if some church from russia decided to
butt in like the mormons do. my experience of the church is, mormons can only
see what view point, theirs.

Yes or No? Love an Answer

May 4, 2008 1:47 p.m.

I am LDS and do not have the answer to this question but honestly wonder:

If the LDS Church were asked to provide copies of identifying deceased
member records (birth, blessing, marriage, sealing, death, etc.)for the purpose
of FLDS plural marriage sealings, or similar Scientology or Wicken ordinances,
WOULD THE CHURCH WILLINGLY AND KNOWINGLY PROVIDE THOSE? I know the Church would
not make an issue of that occuring in general without their assistance - but
would the Church actually provide records and documents to knowingly assist in
that? The Catholic Church is not demanding that baptisms for the dead stop. They
are simply requiring that records not be provided to actively assist in the
ordinance. Rather than the defensiveness I am reading, I would love to hear
whether we believe the Church would actively and knowingly assist in FLDS,
Scientology or Wicken cermonies for LDS deceased? (and rememeber, the Catholic
Church veiws us no differently than we view those groups)

I wouldn't mind

May 4, 2008 1:35 p.m.

I wouldn't mind if someone from another faith posthumously baptized me. I
personally believe it wouldn't make a difference one way or another. A few on
here have claimed the LDS church would make a big deal if another church did
what we do. We wouldn't care. Try us. We believe our baptism is done with the
proper authority and anything else would be a gesture of love, but take none
effect.

We also believe the deceased will choose for themselves to
accept or reject the ordinance. Therefore, we are not making decisions for them.
We are simply giving them a chance to receive something they weren't able to
receive during their time on earth.

This doctrine may sound strange,
but I won't apologize for it. I believe it's true, and I believe it shows the
mercy of an all-loving Father in Heaven.

The Afterlife Difference

May 4, 2008 1:35 p.m.

I think much of the problem with this lies in the LDS belief that everyone
(minus the very few who become Sons of Perdition) will have an opportunity to
accept the Gospel after this life. Even those LDS who were baptized and fell
away will continue to have opportunities to repent and progress after death.
This is without a doubt my very favorite LDS doctrine and I believe is an
extremely compassionate doctrine reflecting a compassionate God. We do not
believe our final reward is based soley on this life. We believe this life is in
reality only a blip in comparison to the pre-existence and afterlife - both of
which include decisions and progression that affect what we are to eventually
become. I have always struggled with the alternate belief that this life is all
one has - what a narrow belief desregarding individual circumstances that only
God can judge. But this difference is largely at the heart of this dispute. LDS
believe they are assisting deceased of all backgrounds in their CONTINUING
journey and decisions. Others believe the journey and accompanying eternal
decisions have been made while on earth and are complete. How to bridge that is
key.

Carol

May 4, 2008 1:34 p.m.

When my LDS son was dying of cancer some years ago an elderly non-LDS couple
came to him in his place of business asking if it was alright if they placed
his name in their church prayer circle, My son's response was yes they could. He
said to me later, "Mom, faith is faith and I thought it very touching they cared
enough for me to do that"

And in response to an earlier post- would
I care if the FLDS rebaptized my deceased family members? Nope- I would not
consider it necessary but I would also know it would not do any harm.

And regardless of what faith or none at all, I am grateful the FHL archives
are open to any one who wants to know about their heritage.

The
hearts have been turned to the Fathers and the Fathers to the children. It's
rolling forth, baby.

Just relax in your ignorance and don't you fret
one iota, for even you will have your work done and you will be able to exercise
your own agency to choose.

Oh, and one more thing, Faith without
works is dead and we are indeed saved by grace, AFTER all we can do.

good day PJ

ajarizona

May 4, 2008 1:21 p.m.

I suspect the Catholics greatest backlash will not come from the Mormons, but
from those Catholics who will also be shut out from doing their familytrees. Most will find it difficult to take trips to Italy, Germany, Poland
etc. to search records.

If you want to have a ceremony for my soul,
by whatever means, spinning three times, bouncing a ball off your head and
eating rice cakes, on and offfor three days, or whatever, and you feel by
doing so you are helping my eternal soul, well, then, knock yourself out.

To me, I may feel you're wasting your time, but I am certainly not going
to be offended. Rather, I would be flattered that you cared enough about me to
care, misguided as I may find you to be.

The names to the
Genealogical data-base are not automatically submitted for Temple work, families
must submit them.

People from all over the World use this data base,
a free gift from the Mormons to anybody who needs to use it, for whatever
reason, and they do, by the millions.

Catholics, Jews, Protestants
etc. hold conventions in SLC to use this great data base.

Grow up,
Rome.

RE: Anonymous

May 4, 2008 1:21 p.m.

"Vatican Officials need to mind their own business''...

Are you
joking?

just wondering

May 4, 2008 1:14 p.m.

So, If Mormons believe in the resurrection, why don't you guys wait till the
dead rise to decide for themselves if they want to be Mormons?

Truth Sayer

May 4, 2008 1:12 p.m.

The Apostle Paul never taught baptism for the dead and "endless geneologies"
were also condemned because there was no point in either practice. Why? Because
Christ's supreme sacrifice negatated the laws and rituals of the Cld
Covenant---all such practices were a waste of time!

The atonement of
Christ is all we need for Salvation--religion just adds to God's word more
unneeded laws and rituals.

This is what separates true Christianity
from "religion" (as opposed to Christianity). In Christ, "it is finished." With
religion it's an endless (and pointless) treadmill of works.

Just
accept Salvation through Christ folks---baptism for the dead is just one of many
"dead works" that help no one! Do your research (very easy to prove that baptism
for the dead was only practiced by cults and sects that were not true
Christianity.

Believe what you wish about baptism for the dead, but
if you would stop being spoonfed by religious bondage and do your own research
on the topic, you will easily find out that the practice was not a Christian
practice at all!

Jon

May 4, 2008 1:04 p.m.

I wouldn't care if Catholics or Mormons started praying for my soul or doing
ordinances for me after I die. I could use all the help I can get. By making an
issue out of this, all the Catholics are doing are legitimizing the practice.

LdG

May 4, 2008 1:02 p.m.

Freeman, you aren't LDS are you? Because I don't think that BYU (of recent
years) really stands a chance in that contest. :)

Freddie

May 4, 2008 1:03 p.m.

>>I Corinthians 15:29 Baptism for the dead, If is the most glorious subject, why
did Paul exclude himself by saying "they" practice it and not "we" or "I"
practice it? He was addressing an early cultic practice to prove the
Resurrection. no second chance(Hebrews 9:27)

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 12:57 p.m.

Vatican Officials need to mind their own business and allow this work to
continue. That also includes Pope Benedict; He needs to mind his own business.

Freeman

May 4, 2008 12:48 p.m.

I say we settle this on the football field: BYU vs. Notre Dame. The winner
gets the rights to the records.

Vernal Roid

May 4, 2008 12:39 p.m.

So much Hate over religion. Hummmmmm

Clark Larsen

May 4, 2008 12:38 p.m.

PEOPLE! PEOPLE! Let's all just calm down for a second and take a deep breath.

Okay, now let's try and look at this calmly and objectively. The
fact is, the Catholic Church, like any religion, has a right to keep their
records confidential. No one should dispute that. To my fellow LDS Church
members, let's give the General Authorities and Family History leaders time to
work out the details of this request.

I seriously doubt this will
bring Family History work to a hault. Of course, things will have to be altered,
but let's not hit the panic button, okay?

To Catholic 12:11 -
Thank you for your comments. My only response would be this. If, as a Latter-day
Saint, someone from another faith were to baptize my deceased family members in
their temple, I would honestly NOT BE offended. It would in no way take away
from the good name of my ancestors, and why should it? And if someone from
another church wanted to baptize me, after I died, why would I care? I'm
dead.

Some people may be offended, but I simply would not be.

DeseretratinNC

May 4, 2008 12:38 p.m.

Blah Blah Blah!! Mormon v. Non-mormon. Anything to call one another a name or
start an arguement. I've watched it for 50+ years, like 2 children on the
playground fighting over a toy. Sad it is I say, sad it is!

Plausibility of baptising all

May 4, 2008 12:32 p.m.

Someone earlier mentioned that it was implausible for the church to baptize for
the dead everyone who ever lived. Estimates of this number are on the order of
50 to 100 billion people, so MATHEMATICALLY speaking, if 100 billion people
needed to be baptized, and each temple could do 100 ordinances per hour, then in
order to get the ordinances of every person ever lived done in the time period
of ONE CENTURY (100 years) then it would require a mere 1140 temples each
working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for 100 years. Tweak that number to about
120 per hour and only 6 days a week gets roughly the same number, if you're
worried about keeping the Sabbath day holy. :-) Interesting thought-experiment.
This is assuming, of course, that all these records are available and that
members of the church are willing to put the time and effort into working at the
temple.

Regardless, I believe it is a very important and needful
thing, equally needful to helping the living. God knows all the precise
reasons, but it's important for each member to receive this testimony for
themselves.

Marilyn

May 4, 2008 12:28 p.m.

I am LDS. I have a friend who is Catholic and suffering with MS. In 2000 I went
to Israel with my husband. While visiting the Wailing Wall, I wrote my friend's
name on a piece of paper and pushed it into a hole in the wall, just as others
were doing. A prayer is a prayer is a prayer. God hears them all. It was a labor
of love and of faith. When I told my friend what I had done she was grateful.
Baptism of those who have passed on is another demonstration of love and faith.
The Church is blessing people, according to their (our) beliefs.I believe the
Pope needs to rethink his decision.

mom

May 4, 2008 12:27 p.m.

I think the majority of responders are missing the point. The mormon practice is
disgusting and appears arrogant. I am not Catholic, but I don't believe I have
ever heard of them attempting to convert dead mormons by baptising them. Why
should the Catholics (or ANY self respecting entity) assist mormons in this
bizarre practice?

AZLDSGuy

May 4, 2008 12:22 p.m.

agree - What Rights??? hmmm the same God given rights that you have and share.
The right to choose and to speak freely. I respect your choices please be an
adult and share the same respect.

Gain some clarity here people

May 4, 2008 12:15 p.m.

What if Huckabee went around converting dead momons.

Why can't we let
the dead rest in peace.

Surely a fair God will allow those who have
passed through the veil a chance at the gospel and all it's rites and rituals if
someone on earth forgot to do it?

Quit sweating the politics.

The Catholic Church sees us a kooks anyway.

Kaitlyn

May 4, 2008 12:14 p.m.

Travis is completely correct. They have the right to withhold their records if
they like; it'll slow things down for now, but it's not that long until all
records and all history will be open to us. Everyone will be offered the chance
for baptism, some are just going to have to wait longer because of this. The
work will go forth, no matter who tries to stand in its way.

And no,
the Church doesn't release the records of /living/ members, because those
records can be abused to harrass people. However, the records of our dead /are/
available, for anyone to access . . . on our family history websites . . . funny
coincidence there . . .

(count me among those who wouldn't be
bothered if I were rebaptised -- or unbaptised -- after my death)

Catholic

May 4, 2008 12:11 p.m.

Have to agree, by the look of these comments many LDS dont understand.

1. Sharing church records for those who wish to learn about their ancesters is
wonderful, but the purpose of LDS research is to re-baptize members of another
faith into Mormonism...just in case. LDS claim the right by saying the dead are
ancestors (even if remotely related), but what about the concerns of the direct
descendants? The Jewish people were profoundly offended, and I cant blame
them.

2. For those who claim that they are not offended if a
Catholic lights a candle for them or prays for them, then great. Were not
offended if you pray for us either. But there is no comparison. Baptism is an
ordinance, not a prayer.

3. Paul didn't say what shall we do which
are baptized for the dead, he said they, and his point was not to advocate the
practice, but to illustrate the point of resurrection. Paul wasn't performing
baptisms for the dead. Baptism for the dead was a heretical practice performed
by at least one apostate group (Marcionites @150 AD) from the mainstream
Catholic faith. Do you still not undertand why it is offensive to Catholics?

Agree

May 4, 2008 12:11 p.m.

I agree with Mike A. 11:50 a.m. After all, what right do the Mormons have to
express their opinion on subjects related pertaining ligious practices,
especially on the Deseret News website?

Wyman

May 4, 2008 12:09 p.m.

How unfortunate for all the genealogists in the world, most of whom are not
members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Even though
information on these individuals can be found in many other data bases, it is
unfortunate that this specific information will not become part of the growing,
interconnected, worldwide data bases that help people find their ancestors in
their quest to understand more clearly who they are, and know more about their
family history. If the Catholic Church believes itself as being Christs official
representative instution on earth, what other people, as believers also in
Christ, do with their family genealogy information should be of no concern to
the Fathers of the Church, even if they dont believe in the practice of baptism
for the dead as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:29, a practice which apparently
did not stop Paul from preaching his understanding of the Gospel of our Lord,
and using this practice as an example of how important it is to make sure
everyone hears Christs saving message.

Ernie

May 4, 2008 12:01 p.m.

Non Mormon, No one is forcing anything on anybody. If by chance the LDS Church
is true, where is the harm? You emphatecally call us arrogant for trying to
help other? If you claim that you know we do not pocess the truth, who then is
the arrogant one?

AZLDSGuy

May 4, 2008 11:59 a.m.

I am a former Catholic and a grateful convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints. I have not a single negative thing to say about the Catholic
Church in any way. As an ex-member it would not be appropriate. However being
LDS, I understand both sides of the debate and can see how those less learned
would make disparaging comments.

If some one decided to try to
baptize me posthumously it would mean nothing, they lack the proper authority
for it to be recognized by myself or the Lord. So I say go for it.

As for closing the records it seems like a double standard from those outside
of the Church. If we closed our records, then we would be attacked no matter the
reason. However, we are attacked because the Catholics chose to close their
records to us. This is a very typical double standard from those in the world.
We are attacked for the actions of others.

I will go and do.. not
sit and stew.

Sue

May 4, 2008 11:55 a.m.

I have to admit that I was saddened by the news story this morning. Up to now I
have been grateful that a partnership between LDS microfilming and Catholic
granting access has blessed the entire world. Without LDS microfilming the
parish records, they would have been lost forever. Without the cooperation of
Catholic officials, the great genealogical work would not be accomplished.

In our Family History Center, the patron who utilizes the German parish
registers the most is a Catholic priest who does genealogical research for
others. Perhaps the Catholic church could microfilm their own records and make
them available to the world--bypassing the LDS church?

European
ecclesiastical history may confuse the baptism issue for some, where
non-believers were forced to become baptized for face death. Simply having a
proxy baptism in the temple, does NOT make the deceased person a MEMBER of the
LDS Church! The dead have a CHOICE to accept or reject this ordinance. All
that is recorded is that the ordinance was performed, not whether it was
accepted. We have an obligation to baptize those of our ancestry, but this does
not to force them to be members..that is their choice.

Re: to Julie

May 4, 2008 11:52 a.m.

The problem with your argument is that many of these records are hundreds of
years old. It's not like we're talking about the Church of Satan baptizing
Grandma Beth or Uncle John (as far as I understand it the only way that a
deceased person can have this work done for them is if an actual FAMILY MEMBER
submits the name). And I don't think that very many people would really care
too much if some fanatical "cult" were digging up old records that are hundreds
of years old and performing religous ordinance for them. I have an interest in
MY ancestors even though I'm not catholic.

Bill G

May 4, 2008 11:50 a.m.

Decider of Dominator: "Turn that around: what gives Mormons the right to make a
religious decision for those who have died and were not of the LDS faith,
especially if one did not choose to be part of the LDS faith when alive?"

Nobody has given mormons, or anyone else, the right to make a religious
decision for those who have died. What makes you think this? It is clearly
stated that anyone baptized posthumously must either accept or decline it. It
is their own free will to choose. No living or dead mormon, catholic or anyone
else can make that decision for them.

Mike A.

May 4, 2008 11:50 a.m.

Clearly after reading many of these posts you can see that the D News is LDS
owned and the vast majority of its readers are LDS. That is why I only look at
the high school sports online DNews. They clearly offer better coverage in high
school sports. I just happened to see online coverage on this topic and had to
laugh as I started to read the posts. I'm wondering why all you LDS people are
online this sunday morning. Probably having a cup of coffee as you browse the
net!!!!

Reality

May 4, 2008 11:47 a.m.

This is one of those areas where there should not be a seperation of church and
state. The state should impose laws against church infringment on personal name
and indentity rights. Many people have worked hard to earn their name
recognition and its representation of their person. It is unjust for others to
modify it by putting their imprint on it.

Bill G

May 4, 2008 11:46 a.m.

Mark: "I was baptized Lutheran, and chose to be Catholic, and don't want any
revisionist history written about me after I die."

No revisionist
history is being written about anyone, so you can rest easy here. I see a common
theme of lack of understanding about what these records are used for. They are
microfilmed and added to a freely available public database to make it easier
for you Mark to trace your family history. Adding these records to this
database does not rewrite history nor make you a mormon, nor does any baptism
for the dead make anyone a mormon. One other thing that is being misunderstood
is that just having your name in this database does not qualify you for baptism
of the dead. YOUR family members MUST submit your name separately and
independently for baptism of the dead.

Bill G

May 4, 2008 11:46 a.m.

Cuts Both Ways: "Would it bother mormons if let's say the FLDS were re-doing the
temple ordinances because they figured the mainstream LDS had gone astray."

Not at all. If what they are doing is not true, what does it matter?

orion: "I would think there would be a cry of outrage among the LDS folk
if Catholics suddenly baptized deceased, life-long, temple worthy, LDS members.
How about church prophets? How about those who died while in service of the LDS
Church?"

There would be no outrage at all. Once again, If what they
are doing is not true, what does it matter?

Anonymous: "I wonder how
you would feel if a group that you thought was a cult, say The Church of Satan,
baptised your family into their Church. Would you like it???"

No
problem at all. If what they are doing is not true, what does it matter?

Jason: "Mormons want to be left alone to worship how they want and
should leave others to do the same."

Which is exactly what they are
doing. I don't see any mormons going into other churches and shutting them down
saying they are not allowed to worship that way.

Re:Ernie

May 4, 2008 11:43 a.m.

I don't speak for the dead, I let them be. Your religion should do the same
instead of assuming through your arrogance that you have the right to force one
of your religious rites on them.

THEY OWN THE RECORDS

May 4, 2008 11:40 a.m.

THEY OWN THE RECORDS THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONTROL THE RECORDS.

Paul DeBry

May 4, 2008 11:36 a.m.

The Mormon Church does not baptize the dead INTO their church. They make that
baptism AVAILABLE to that person in the spirit world. The baptism is valid only
if that person accepts it. The Mormon Church believes than no one in the spirit
world is forced into any church, including the Mormon Church. For that baptism
to be valid in the spirit world, the dead person must accept the teachings of
the Mormon Church. If they do not accept those teachings, the baptism is not
effective and the person does not become a member of the Mormon Church. Free
agency applies there just as it does here. It is silly to think otherwise.

More ExCatholic/Now Mormon

May 4, 2008 11:35 a.m.

On many occasions I've had personal Spiritual proof of the joy that my dead
relatives felt when their Babtismal work was done for them.

People
should spend more time serving others and doing good rather than finding fault
in people with different beliefs than theirs. We Mormons do our best to love
God, our families, our country, and try to do good to all men, including our
kindred dead, having old-fashioned values that we live by.

Our
Church sends Humanitarian Aid all over the world -- school kits, hygiene kits,
infant kits, quilts, food, etc. Our people help clean up after disasters. A
while back people in an area of the Southeastern US thanked two Churches for
their great help -- the Mormons and members of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints. Hmmm -- they are both the same Church! I'd say, "By their
fruits ye shall know them." Matthew 7:20

Microfilming

May 4, 2008 11:33 a.m.

I recently asked not too long ago how far back in death records the LDS church
goes with microfilming- they don't index any names of those who have been dead
less than 45 years. The reason for my asking this is because my parents work had
been done in the 1990 and the person who submitted their names claimed they had
no children. There are children - 7 of them. I'm the oldest and the only
member.

Need to make sure you have all your ducks lined up in a row
before do the work.

Ernie

May 4, 2008 11:33 a.m.

To NON Mormon. Where do you get off speaking for the dead? First, the baptism
is a choice. Isn't it better to give them the choice? Maybe the choice was not
presented to them during their lives. In the Bible we are directed by God to
spread the word. If you don't believe in the LDS Church, that is OK. But, if
you believe in the Bible, it is a bit hypocritical to bash Mormons for trying to
do the will of God.

ExCatholic/Now Mormon

May 4, 2008 11:30 a.m.

I've been a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints for 31
years. Our Church teaches that he realized the Churches of his day were wrong
and he was trying to get back to the original Church of New Testament times. He
couldn't have been a Mormon. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
was established in 1830, long after his day.

Also,to "my questions:"
You mentioned wondering why people don't think God is "god" enough to save
people without Baptism, etc. Jesus Christ insisted on being Baptized "to fulfil
all righteousness." Matthew 3:15. Why would He do that if it wasn't
necessary?

AZLDSGal

May 4, 2008 11:29 a.m.

This may be a little set back for those on the other side but we all know in the
end that everyone that has ever lived and those that have yet to live will be
baptized and will have the choice. That is the one good thing about the Lords
true church and that Heavenly Father will always help his children find the
light. There will always be a way....

JP

May 4, 2008 11:25 a.m.

My favorite part of this article is the pararaph describing how baptisms for the
dead work, as though it's common knowledge.

"A practice in which
the names of the deceased are baptized into the LDS faith so that they may be
united in the afterlife with LDS families, if they so choose."

Shouldn't this be prefaced by something indicating that only Mormons believe
in this wacky afterlife footnote? I know the DN is generally pretty objective
considering that they are owned by the church, but come on.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 11:21 a.m.

To Fredd -- You obviously know nothing about the LDS archives. You claim that
the LDS don't share the records in their vaults, which is completely not true.
The Family History Library itself is proof that they're sharing. As is the new
Church History Library currently being built.

I understand the
concern here. But I also agree the Catholic Church having potentially selfish
reasons for allowing the LDS to microfilm. For one, I have heard it said that
parishes in Europe have been happy with microfilming because it then means they
don't have lots of people trampling through and asking to see records, many of
which are old and fragile. Additionally, the potential for records to be
destroyed is such that it would always be nice to have a backup.

Join
a genealogy group on the web and you'll notice by a far majority most of them
are not LDS. And they are grateful to have the LDS records available. I research
Poland, in which most people were Catholic. Most of the people in my research
group, descendants of Polish immigrants, are probably still Catholic.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 11:21 a.m.

I can't believe the number of responses to this forum that see no harm in taking
these records for baptism for the dead. It is NOT just about geneology... I am
LDS and would be outraged to be baptized Catholic after I die. Even though I
don't believe there would be any impact, I believe LDS doctrine and have made my
choice--it would be offensive to have it be undermined or challenged in any way.
Don't be so self-centered people!

to Orion

May 4, 2008 11:20 a.m.

Personally, i would have no problem with the catholics doing their thing after
death. Why? becasue even in the next life, we will have our free agency to
choose.

Yes, it does cut both ways.

AJ

May 4, 2008 11:19 a.m.

We're all descendents of Adam and Eve, and therefore, not only spirit
children from the same God but literally blood relatives as well.

How is it, your claim to dead ancestors is any greater than mine? We're all
related!

Mormons are charged with doing saving ordinances for all who
have lived before. 1 Cor.15:29 John 3:5. That is their faith, and they are free
to practice it.

This does not put Catholics on to the Mormon rolls
with membership. Nor does it bind anyone in the hereafter. Every individual has
their freedom to choose.

Quesiton: Who is anybody to tell anyone
else, they can't listen to new ideas in the spirit world?

Between
the crucifiction and the resurrection, Christ went and preached to the spirits
in the spirit world.

Really, to what end?

The
implication being, there is still much work to do, even after death.

To Catholics, this is all nonsense anyway. So where's the beef?

The
idea of one Church trying to thwart the harmless practices of another is a tad
condescending.

Look, fellas in Rome, it's not the the 3rd-16th
centuries anymore. Take down the stakes and put out the fires.

Compulsion is passe', choice rules.

Deborah

May 4, 2008 11:18 a.m.

After reading the story three times and going over some of the comments posted
here I've come to the conclusion that the story lacks depth and accuracy. In
other words something is missing in the information provided by the news article
which has triggered a defensive reaction from the mostly Mormons who have posted
a commentary. I say let's research this issue further and, meanwhile, stop all
the Catholic bashing.

Re:Aguia

May 4, 2008 11:16 a.m.

"We know that all eventually will have the opportunity to make their
choices."

No.......you believe they will, but you don't know.

Non Mormon

May 4, 2008 11:13 a.m.

You LDS people just don't get it, do you. Your practices are offensive when it
comes to baptism for the dead. These dead people can't speak for themselves now,
but they made their choices in life. So regardless of your argument that you're
just giving them the chance, or that family members want it, neither you nor
their family members have the right to speak for them just because they can't
speak for themselves. You're just another arrogant religion that starts with the
belief that you're right, and everyone else is wrong, just like every other
religion. You're not special. So take some advice. Lead the way by example. The
example of minding your own business instead of trying to force your beliefs on
others, or sell them to others through TV ads and going door to door like some
insurance company.

Aguia

May 4, 2008 11:09 a.m.

It's a question of perspective.

LDS see baptisms for the dead as an
act of love.Others see it as disrespect.Neither is really going to
convince the other that their perspective is wrong.

I can understand
the Catholics thought process on this restriction; even though i may not approve
of it. I think it will hurt those who are researching their geneology for a
multitude of reasons.

Whatever may happen now. We know that all
eventually will have the opportunity to make their choices.

Bill

May 4, 2008 11:08 a.m.

I would think the Pope should re-consider this policy if only for selfish
reasons. Just think what would happen if he were able to completely shut down
genealogy work. All those LDS senior citizens who spend so much time and effort
in this work would be unleashed on the world in search of the living!

I would think he would rather keep them engaged in what he perceives as a
worthless effort.

uncannygunman

May 4, 2008 11:08 a.m.

As an atheist, I hereby unbaptize ALL souls, past, present, and future, of any
faith whatsoever, so the poor dead folks can rest in peace. Problem solved and
amen.

My View

May 4, 2008 11:07 a.m.

Additional Thought:

Cultural and idealogical differences are
contributing to the bad feelings here. It seems that 1) those of the LDS faith
don't completely understand the backgrounds, cultures, and beliefs informing the
outrage felt by members of other faiths at the idea of baptism for the dead. And
2) members of other faiths don't completely understand the background, culture,
and belief that make baptism for the dead by ANY religion unoffensive and
important to members of the LDS faith.

Clearly, more
non-confrontational dialog between all groups is needed--along with a bit of
willing effort to understand by all groups.

A European

May 4, 2008 11:01 a.m.

The family history centers in the ward buildings in Germany are frequented more
by non LDS people than LDS people. They benefit from the work the LDS church has
done by collecting records. They open the doors for all others to use the
records.Why doesn't the Catholic church do the same? Invites a lot more
people to also look into their churches that are so scarcely visited even on
Sundays now.

Not Mormon

May 4, 2008 10:58 a.m.

Hey Mormons.......the catholic church doesn't want you. Get over it.

Clare

May 4, 2008 10:57 a.m.

I'm not happy at all with this situation. I just found out that on my birth
side (I am adopted), there is a very strong possiblity that my ancestors were
Jews who converted to Catholism. I want to know who they were. What happened?
Were they coherced into it or did they join willing? Were they even Jewish?
I'm dying of curiosity. These records are in Poland or what was once part of
Russia. It's not fair that I can't find out about them. I can only hope that
the church has gotten some on microfilm before this ridiculous statement by the
Vatican. What are they afraid of?

None of your business

May 4, 2008 10:54 a.m.

It bothers people because it is meddling in the lives of people who either don't
like having their dead relatives information involved in another religion or who
just don't like mormons. It's really pretty simple. If other religions and
their members don't what you nosing around in their business, then please have
the decency and respect to butt out.

Adam

May 4, 2008 10:54 a.m.

I'm LDS and while I think the Catholic church's decision is unfortunate based
on my beliefs I also recognize that it's important to respect their decision.
We did the same thing for the Jews with regard to their wishes for Holocaust
victims. Even if we disagree with the stance of the Catholic church on this
issue, and can't see why they should be upset by something they don't believe
in... I think the takeaway lesson is that by making this decision and the Jews
making a similar request in the past, that obviously it DOES bother them. In
this case we might be better off respecting their wishes. That's not to say a
dialogue shouldn't begin to try to increase understanding on the topic, but
expressions of outrage regarding this decision followed by dismissals of their
feelings as invalid... that might not be the best approach.

Concerned Researcher

May 4, 2008 10:52 a.m.

I was saddened to read this article this morning. I have absolutely enjoyed
researching my ancestors, to see who and how they lived, and garner treasures of
their lives that ultimately help me to understand my own makeup.

However sad this may be, let us take courage that the works of God will go
forward, "boldly, nobly, and independently." Let us be patient, and faithful.
The Lord will open doors that have heretofore been closed, soften the hearts of
those who have concerns regarding these sacred ordinances. The words of Nephi
come to mind in setbacks and trials such as these, as stated in 1 Nephi 3:7 (in
the Book of Mormon), "I will go and do the things which the Lord has commanded,
for I know the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, SAVE HE
SHALL PREPARE A WAY FOR THEM TO ACCOMPLISH THE THING WHICH HE COMMANDETH
THEM."Let us always be found being kind in word, thought, and action to
everyone around us, despite what they may think, do, or say about us or this
work.

Baptism by Proxy Doctrine

May 4, 2008 10:48 a.m.

For those of you unfamiliar with our doctrine: Baptism for the dead does not
mean they are automatically saved, they have the option to accept or reject the
ordinance. Christ was perfect and yet he was still baptized. This is a mandatory
ordinance to enter the kingdom. We as mormons believe that we are doing a
service in this baptism by proxy, giving those whom we are being baptized for a
chance to accept or reject it. And as for doing things for the living, just
google the words "mormons and katrina" or "mormons and san diego fires" and
you'll see that it was the mormons who were there first for the living and
wounded.

Understand the doctrine

May 4, 2008 10:45 a.m.

The LDS doctrine of baptisms for the dead (mentioned in the New Testament) does
not take away the right for anyone to choose. Just as in this life, anyone who
is baptized (regardless of faith) have the choice to practice their religion or
not. Our belief in baptizing for the dead simply gives them the opportunity to
accept the ordinance or not. That's all. It doesn't force anyone to become a
Mormon. We don't believe in forcing decisions at all, simply giving
opportunities to choose.

Let's Be Honest

May 4, 2008 10:46 a.m.

I am LDS, and I'm sure none of us would be overlly concerned to learn that the
FLDS, Wickens, Scientologists or even more mainstream religions were performing
certain religious ceremonies on behalf of our deceased LDS ancestors. BUT, would
the Church willingly and knowingly hand over our records for that purpose? I
highly, highly doubt that. And what if they even provided some additional,
tangible service in return (like we are by putting names on microfilm)? I'm
still not sure we would willingly hand over baptismal, blessing, birth, or
temple sealing records for Wicken cermonies even if some other beneficial
service were provided as a part of the process. And let's not fool ourselves,
the Catholic Church looks upon the LDS Church as no less a cult than we do FLDS,
Scientology or Wickens.

Also, as an active member of the Church, I
have never quite understood the need to put in literally millions of hours for
the work of the dead. A work that we acknowledge will never end up reaching all
who have died. Only a tiny fraction actually. The rest will require heavenly
intervention anyway. Therefore, perhaps those millions of hours could be put
toward the LIVING?

Live & Let Live

May 4, 2008 10:32 a.m.

Sorry but I do NOT want my Catholic church records given out so I can be
baptized as LDS. You can go on and on about the value of geneology records but
TRY to understand and REFLECT about why many find these baptisms offensive. To
brush it off as "well what does it matter if they don't believe in our doctrine
anyway" is unacceptable. Come on if the Catholic or any other church began a
massive undertaking to baptize all Mormoms you can bet an uproar would follow.
How would YOU feel? And please realize that geneology does not hold an equal
importance to all religions.

Morena

May 4, 2008 10:31 a.m.

Orion- My thoughts exactly. LDS would be offended in a big way if the reverse
were going on. If a Protestant denomination took all the LDS names and did this
re-baptism for the dead (which was mentioned in the bible but not practiced by
the one mentioning it or encouaged)then the LDS would be offended. You all need
to read your Bibles and seriously learn the scripture...who said it, did he
practice it(NO) and then you would understand why this is so disrespectful.
Congrats to the Catholics!!! Hope the Protestants follow suit!!!

I am for the living

May 4, 2008 10:27 a.m.

Let's live and help the living and forget about the dead who are with God
anyway...Do you believe that Mother Theresa is in limbo waiting for one of us to
baptise her?Instead copying records, let's go to Chad, Laos, Haiti and
other places where there is so much suffering. They need our help now not when
they are dead.

RGG

May 4, 2008 10:26 a.m.

I'm not so sure LDS folks would be "outraged" if other churches or cults or
sects were to perform their religious ceremonies for deceased LDS members.

We believe that an individual's agency prevails, whether here in in the
afterlife. Just as we hope those who are baptized by proxy will accept that
baptism, we also hope those who are already baptized would choose to stay
baptized. However, the choice is theirs, and we certainly don't have any
illusions that our desires for them will override their choices.

My View

May 4, 2008 10:23 a.m.

As a member of the LDS faith, I would not be offended by any member of any other
faith or group performing a baptism in my behalf or my family's behalf while I
am living or dead. I believe such action to be an act of love from them to me
and an attempt to follow gospel referred to in the Bible. I also believe it is
sanctioned by God only when both proper authority from God is used and when my
personal choice affirms the action. It certainly doesn't rewrite my personal
history or preference.

To those who are offended by the doctrine of
baptism for the dead, I say you simply do not fully understand it. Find a friend
who is a member of the LDS faith and ask them about it.

To those of
us who are members of the LDS faith: hard words, pointing fingers, derision and
outrage won't solve this challenge. Continuing kindness, reaching out, faith and
prayer might avail much.

Wake up!

May 4, 2008 10:15 a.m.

All these hypothetical situations a few are putting forth about other churches
unbaptizing LDS, etc., show the author is not aware that it wouldn't matter.
You are trying to project your own fears on the LDS.No LDS would raise a
stink. The church wouldn't worry -- unless we believed those other churches
actually had God's real authority. We'd actually just shrug and say thank-you
for the good intentions.Obviously the 10 who have posted such fears
haven't read the 60+ comments that already made this point.Or they haven't
awakened yet this morning.

Re: Questions and others

May 4, 2008 10:12 a.m.

God's ordinances do not "hamper" his ability to save. He is all-powerful.
However, God is a god of justice, not mercy alone. Without justice, there could
not be any mercy. Baptism and other ordinances are commanded by God so that the
law night be satisfied. While He is a god of mercy, we must also obey certain
laws since he is also a god of justice. As far as this article is concerned and
the several comments that have been made, I am not worried. While I respect
those friends of other faiths and feel strongly that we should allow them to
worship how, where or what they may, I also feel we should be allowed the same
courtesy. This returns us to mercy and justice. If baptism is the gate to heaven
then truly God is merciful to permit this saving ordinance to be performed for
all of His children. Is it merciful to say that because one who has never known
God or ever been able to even know His gospel and dies that they are eternally
damned? Where is the mercy in that? God is in charge not man and everything will
work out.

Fredd

May 4, 2008 10:11 a.m.

Am I banned from posting? How the LDS church which has volumes upon volumes of
documents in its vaults it won't share with anyone, and calls its temple sacred
not secret can criticize anyone for withholding offcial documents is truly the
pot calling the kettle black.

family history worker

May 4, 2008 10:10 a.m.

In the 35 years I have served in family history centers, very few of the people
who have researched catholic records were LDS. Most of them are genealogists,
who, when they find their ancestors records are so happy. And so disappointed
when the records are not available. The people I know are not doing the
research for Temple Work. These people do not have the means or ability to go
to the parish to get the information. With lack of family input or even
knowledge, they would have to search several localities. To cut the records off
for them will make their research impossible.

Joan

May 4, 2008 10:09 a.m.

If other churches wanted to take my records and baptize me into their church
after I died, I wouldn't care because it would have no meaning to me. When we
do baptisms for those who have passed, the work is done and then those on the
other side have a right to accept or reject the work. It is not automatic.
Satan's church could do my work and I wouldn't care because upon death, it would
have no meaning for me whatsoever. The work is a gift, waiting to be given and
if it's not accepted, so be it. At least they were given the chance. It is a
gift of love.

tigerlily

May 4, 2008 10:07 a.m.

to No lds should be upset: the scriptures tell us that there is no need for
baptism til the age of 8, babies are perfect and have no need for baptism. when
we are doing are family history, we are entitled to those records that the
catholic church has if our relatives are catholic

Kelly

May 4, 2008 10:04 a.m.

Well folk, What did the Pope observe while visiting the USA 2 1/2 weeks ago?
Think about it. He probably thought the LDS church and FLDS were two of the
same. The Pope was here while the raid in Texas was going on. The FLDS church is
going to cause us lots of problems. The Catholic church probably thinks of us
HERETICS!

whocares?

May 4, 2008 10:03 a.m.

lithophysa1 - I could care less. If it isn't true, then why would it matter? Why
do people get so worked up about baptisms for the dead - if they don't believe
it is true, then does it really matter?

Mary

May 4, 2008 10:00 a.m.

I would like to make two points:First, while I was doing my family
research in Poland a few years back, the Catholic Priests were the only church
officials who had to be PAID for me to see the records of my great-grandparents.
In Belgium, the other churchs were gladly opening the records, so I could trace
my family roots. So, I guess if you want to PAY for your own family records, I
guess the Catholic don't object.Secondly, my Mother is devout Catholic and
relished in the idea, when she broke her hip, that her LDS daughter put her name
on the prayer roll, her Jewish niece had the members of the synagogue praying
for her, her Cahtolic sister lit a candle on her behalf, her Protestant
sister-in-law had her name included in the weekly service prayer list. This problem with the Catholic church is from the leaders, not the members.
The members don't care, the priests want their bribe money, and the
adminstration wants to be devisive.

Anonymous

May 4, 2008 9:55 a.m.

Imagine for a moment that you are at a great feast where every food imaginable
prepared by the greatest cooks ever. Many of your friends and relatives are
there with you but many more are not.

They are on the other side of a
huge fence. On their side the "feast" consists of chips, dip, sandwiches,
cookies and water. Okay but not great.

The only way for people on
the other side of the fence to get to your side is if someone on your side
unlocks one of the gates. But this gate is weird in that you can unlock it fron
your side but you can not open it. The person who you unlock it for must open
the gate and pass through. It is a two step process. Once you unlock the gate
for that person they can pass through at any time but it has to be thier choice,
if they choose not to pass through it is thier right.

Babtism for the
dead works the same way it does not automaticly make some one Mormon any more
than grabing a person of the street saying the prayer and pushing him under the
water would.

Catholic III

May 4, 2008 9:54 a.m.

I think the Catholic church is going to back WAY OFF from friendly associations
with LDS because they probably associate the LDS as being like Muslims and the
FLDS religions. This is not good to the rest of the world.

Mormons Not Only Ones in Heaven

May 4, 2008 9:51 a.m.

For you non-Mormons, I would like you to baptize my dead ancestors. It is a
great lesson that members of your faith are not the only ones that will go to
heaven. I realize that officially Catholics believe that I am going to hell.
So the actions of the Pope make sense. Also realize that Mormons can baptize
for the dead, without names, it is the lesson of turning our hearts to our
fore-fathers that is helped by having the names. So, don't believe that
withholding records stops the work done in Mormon temples. It does make me
think that the current Pope is petty and small minded.

Re: Just Me

May 4, 2008 9:50 a.m.

We're giving many the opportunity for membership in the LDS church who were not
given it here on this earth. There is no harm in that.

MetricWrench

May 4, 2008 9:50 a.m.

This merely shows that baptism for the dead must be a good thing and that there
are powers that are always trying to frustrate the work. Everyone knows that the
adversary is continually working to slow that which is good and true, even if we
all don't agree on what is good and true.

If any other group wants to
go to the genealogy library and get some info on my ancestors so they can
perform some kind of posthumous ceremony then by all means be my guest. If it is
something performed out of love of God and fellowman then I am honored. If it is
anything else then who cares.

BTW if the individual who is dead
doesn't want to accept the baptism then they can remain a catholic, even on the
other side. At no point does God force us to believe anything against our will.

To AKL

May 4, 2008 9:52 a.m.

to akl and all of you who keep calling the money given to humanitarian aid "our
money" Remember that the money was given to help people. So it's actually
being used in the right way. We aren't trying to buy any favors.

sjc

May 4, 2008 9:44 a.m.

Joe W....you are incorrect in asserting that the Catholic Church does not
release baptismal information. They won't allow wholesale copying of their
registers, true.

However, many other Christian churches recognize
the validity of Catholic baptism and vice versa. If a baptised Catholic later
joins say the Methodist or Lutheran church, he or she is not rebaptised, and it
works the same way in the other direction.

In such cases, Catholic
parishes will release a baptismal record or certificate as proof to the person's
current church that he or she is already baptised. The Catholic Church does not
recognise LDS baptisms, but neither does the LDS Church recognize any other
baptisms.

PS I am neither Catholic nor LDS.

To Julie

May 4, 2008 9:41 a.m.

This is one of the biggest problems with mormon public relations that the church
shows so little respect for others believes of feelings. Would you feel offended
if your dead relatives were made members of the Nazi party or other disreputable
organizations, maybe Hell's angeles. Why don't we all just mind our own business
and not try to make others liken unto our selfes, especially when we too are so
imperfect.

Common Sense

May 4, 2008 9:40 a.m.

Luckily God's will can never be frustrated, regardless of the decisions of
man.

Also, as the Catholic church does not recognize Mormon baptism,
then in their view they have in essence condemned all deceased Mormons.

The Mormon faith desires to offer a blessing to all, which they can freely
accept or reject. A significant contract.

Voice of reason

May 4, 2008 9:38 a.m.

Seems to me that the LDS church should remove all strings from the process of
collecting family names. That the church only collects the research and provides
research, and hold true to its own statements that it will not do work for these
deceased people unless requested by family members. The change may be subtle but
from the perception of outsiders it maybe enough.

Maybe all it would
be required is develop PAF like programs where they don't mention LDS
information. And then educate the world that we want to only collect the
information out of love and honor for the dead, and that addtional services will
only be at the request of relatives. If the LDS church does this they may get
more approval and assistance in this area.

Keri

May 4, 2008 9:36 a.m.

Mark, I was raised in the Salt Lake area and lived there until I was in my
30s. I have never heard the one about Martin Luther. Go ahead and baptize
me into another religion after I'm dead. I can accept or reject it according to
my own conscience. My mom died 8 years ago. Baptize her into your church. She
will decide to reject it, no harm done as far as I'm concerned. (Except, are
there any other churches that do baptisms for the dead? I'd really like to
know.)The Church quit performing the Jewish baptisms on a large scale
because they were requested to do so.

orion

May 4, 2008 9:29 a.m.

Some of these comments are like the pot calling the kettle black. Why has the
church created a new genealogy site for LDS only? It sounds like public access
to records is being phased out not just by Catholics.

true blue

May 4, 2008 9:27 a.m.

The church doesn't get the names and submit them for baptism for the dead. They
put them on film and the families research them and submit the names. The LDS
church is very sensitive to this to the point that if a closer living relative
is alive permission from that individual must be granted first. And when the
jewish people asked us not to baptize their names we quit doing that.

To orion: God is all powerful and grants mercy and salvation to anyone of
any faith that he sees fit. Contrary to popular belief Mormons don't believe
that only Mormons make it to heaven. We just believe that God has given us an
opportunity to serve and assist in his work.

Mona

May 4, 2008 9:23 a.m.

Decider said: "what gives Mormons the right to make a religious decision for
those who have died and were not of the LDS faith, especially if one did not
choose to be part of the LDS faith when alive?"

LDS don't force
conversion on anyone. We believe each individual lives beyond the grave. We
provide the ordinance. Each individual may accept or reject it.

100%
of my ancestry is either Roman or Byzantine Catholic, and I have been
researching them for 35 years. I have also done research for many other people
curious about their roots. Up to this point each Catholic parish has had their
individual policy concerning their records. Many have given me open access
which I humbly appreciate. Others have refused to even crack open the books,
proclaiming that even a deceased person's personal information should not be
looked at by anyone, period. This new policy will be devastating. The value of
someone learning about their family can make all the difference